this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
86 points (97.8% liked)

politics

18935 readers
3410 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called on the federal government to move “as quickly as possible” to change the way it officially classifies marijuana, saying that “nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed.”

“I cannot emphasize enough that they need to get to it as quickly as possible,” Harris said. “We need to have a resolution based on their findings and their assessment. This issue is stark when one considers the fact that on the schedule currently, marijuana is considered as dangerous as heroin ― as dangerous as heroin ― and more dangerous than fentanyl, which is absurd, not to mention patently unfair.”

Marijuana is currently listed as a Schedule 1 drug by the Drug Enforcement Administration. That classification designates it one of the most dangerous drugs possible, with no medicinal uses. Other substances in the same category include heroin, ecstasy and LSD. Marijuana advocates have been pushing for years for the federal government to either reschedule marijuana to a different category or deschedule it entirely.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 18 points 6 months ago (2 children)

"nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed"

-The person who made a career putting people in jail for smoking weed

[–] MDKAOD@lemmy.ml 19 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Harris has been pro weed for years now. One of the foremost issues with our political system in the US is that these people are elected by a constituency that demands a job be done in a way that they want. (I am purposely ignoring the corporate donor aspect for this statement)

The locality (and the era) demanded drug dealers go to jail, so she did her job. Where Harris has floundered is how she talks about it and attonrs for it today.

You can be outspoken about a politicians past, but it's disingenuous to ignore that a politician has changed, especially so if they have changed with positive progression.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hey now, the hate boner doesn’t get off on logic, it gets off on mindless hate.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call being angry at a prosecutor putting innocent people into prison blind hate exactly. Certainly I wouldn't accept the logic that the constituency wanted to put innocent people in prison and that's why she did it, even if I believe that I would still find that morally repugnant.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 months ago (10 children)

I more mean that there are a lot of new accounts coming in and plastering this hate all over the place, and their reasoning is always “once a hater always a hater.” They aren’t here genuinely, or they are extremely ignorant of how humans work.

load more comments (10 replies)

Yeah. Can't trust'em as far as you can throw'em.

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Harris oversaw more than 1,900 marijuana convictions in San Francisco, previously unreported records from the DA’s office show. Her prosecutors appear to have convicted people on marijuana charges at a higher rate than under her predecessor, based on data about marijuana arrests in the city.

As the political winds blow with her I guess. At least it's a positive change.

[–] drislands@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (7 children)

Sometimes a hypocrite is just a man in the process of changing.

[–] vladmech@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

I kind of want to create an unexpected Sanderson group…

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (22 children)

As an AG, it was her role to uphold the law and bring forward prosecutions.

I'm recognizing positive change, which is an option now with her new role

Edit I'll also acknowledge it's an election year and this is a popular topic TOO

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Eh.

That was when it went from jail to a fine though.

So lots of people stopped giving a shit and started smoking publicly.

And she's been pro legalization for years now.

There's lots of shit to criticize Biden and Harris on, but Harris's time as a DA and her cannabis conviction just isn't a good one.

[–] ArcRay@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago

"Under Harris, the D.A.'s office obtained more than 1,900 convictions for marijuana offenses, including persons simultaneously convicted of marijuana offenses and more serious crimes.[73] The rate at which Harris's office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower.[73] Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and go her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses."

From her Wikipedia page (the reference is pay walled and im not invested enough to figure it out).

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] fustigation769curtain@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You can tell there's an election coming up.

[–] FrostyTrichs@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

On today's episode of "don't bite the hand that feeds" we reclassify marijuana.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 13 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I unironically think that if marijuana should be banned, then so should alcohol

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If they were both first introduced today alcohol would definitely be the one people would want more restricted.

[–] Zozano@lemy.lol 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely not true.

As soon as republicans discover it's easier to convince underaged girls to fuck them if they're drunk, it's going legal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nomous@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Alcohol can kill you pretty quickly if you're not careful, IMO it probably should be more restricted than weed.

[–] Welt@lazysoci.al 4 points 6 months ago

It's too easy to make, and weed is too easy to grow, so neither should be restricted since they're part of our culture and will be consumed anyway. Broadly true for other drugs as well since they can be got, but it's not like just anyone can make MDMA (which, if taken in a pure and controlled dose, is safer than both cannabis and alcohol incidentally, with therapeutic benefits too).

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Clbull@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I think if Biden and Harris were to officially endorse decriminalizing or legalizing recreational marijuana, we'd see a Democrat landslide. But that would require some actual common sense from Congressmen.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 19 points 6 months ago

U.S. President Joe Biden stated in February 2021 that his administration will pursue cannabis decriminalization as well as seek expungements for people with prior cannabis convictions.[1] It can still be found on his campaign website under sentencing reform.[2]

In October 2022, President Biden announced a mass pardon for past federal cannabis possession convictions, encouraged governors to do the same for state cannabis possession convictions, and instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra to review the classification schedule of marijuana, which could result in removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.[20]

Once again, Biden already did the good thing, but you people never heard about it

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

In a single motion they could cut off an enormous source of cash for the traffickers and hard drug dealers.

https://www.propublica.org/article/chinese-organized-crime-us-marijuana-market

[–] maculata@aussie.zone 7 points 6 months ago (4 children)

She’s correct. It’s a completely right ridiculous policy based on a century of racism.

Ok, I used smoke a power of weed. I do not anymore. I do not wish to partake at all to be honest. Yet I think criminalisation of ‘the culture’ makes it both more lucrative to criminal elements who also do much harm in other sectors, and make it even more attractive to youth who might try and quit it sooner.

I’m not saying it’s all bad. I’m saying it’s over-romanced by criminalisation.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (40 children)

Just so everyone knows, the DEA is actively reviewing a report from the Department of Health and Human services where they recommended to reschedule weed to a schedule 3. Biden had directed HHS to research to see if it should be rescheduled, so while biden hasn't unilaterally legalized weed (something that would quickly be challenged in court since presidents don't usually have unilateral power for most things), he has definitely been pushing it not be schedule 1. Which, while not legalization, would be a huge step for not just the industry but for all the medical patients out there who have had their doctors refuse to treat them because they use weed for pain.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

A very important part of this is it allows for federal studies into the benefits of marijuana which is not allowed under schedule 1 status.

load more comments (39 replies)
[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Well I don't do drugs but she could schedule it for tomorrow after breakfast. I know my neighbor smokes it after work for example. 😂.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I grew up straight edge in a religious household. I was so afraid of getting into trouble, I didn't even drink as a teenager even though all my friends did.

Now my work depends on me keeping away from illegal drugs. Seeing as my family's livelihood depends on that, it's a pretty straightforward decision to never cross that line, ever. So I say this as a 30+ yr old who's rarely drank and never done drugs of any kind that weren't prescribed.

If this changes, and it's confirmed that my livelihood wouldn't be threatened for trying it, I would absolutely partake.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago

I hope you have a hell of a good time when this happens

[–] vmaziman@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

As with all things go slow till u know ur limits greenouts aren’t too bad but they happen and better off nodding off in your house that at like work. Also anxiety and paranoia can happen with stronger strains or strong edibles so take it slow

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago

I’d never suggest getting high at work. You’re just asking for trouble, even if it’s not legally a problem. I’d also never suggest drinking at work, to put that into context.

And god forbid you get in an accident while drunk/high, your job will definitely be over, and you’ll more than likely be footing the bill on your own.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 4 points 6 months ago

I barely touched weed my whole life until I got medical access ~5 years ago. I was also never a big drinker or user of other recreational substances.

The stuff helps me so much that I use my vape or edibles almost every single day. That plus the margin of safety makes it downright cruel in my eyes that it’s prohibited in so many places.

But I guess given the racist motives of the anti-marijuana push 40 years ago, maybe the cruelty was the point.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (9 children)

For the, "why are you doing it now, convenient!" crowd - first of all yes, that's how politics works. Trump is a constant heartbeat of bullshit and you need to have strategically timed news and events to stay in people's short term memories for voting impact - especially the committed stoners :)

But also, Biden admin has been working towards this for years. He is not the most progressive anything, but he's doing more than his predecessors on either side (and the pathetic gop alternative) and that's progress.

You don't make major legislative change by firing a cannon at the front door - you set several small fires at all the other exits on the building and then when all that is in motion, you just knock on the front door to warn everyone about the fire and they walk out willingly.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/06/statement-from-president-biden-on-marijuana-reform/

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/06/politics/marijuana-decriminalization-white-house-joe-biden/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/22/1221230390/biden-pardons-clemency-marijuana-drug-offenses

On December 2, 2022, Biden signed the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act - "the first standalone marijuana-related bill approved by both chambers of the United States Congress"

Biden approved the Viktor Bout–Brittney Griner prisoner exchange work Russia on December 8, 2022 which involved an American WNBA athlete being convicted of cannabis possession on Russian soil and being held in Russian prison.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago (62 children)

“Somebody ought to do something about this ASAP,” says one of the only people on the planet actually capable of doing something about it for the last 4 years. OK.

[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Elections are coming up so it's time to talk about it and do nothing else that would make it happen

load more comments (61 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›