SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Center for American Progress reports
On [February 27], days after White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters to expect stricter enforcement of federal pot law, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recycled discredited drug war talking points in remarks of his own.
"I believe it's an unhealthy practice, and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago, and we're seeing real violence around that", Sessions said. "Experts are telling me there's more violence around marijuana than one would think and there's big money involved."
In reality, violent crime rates tend to decrease where marijuana is legalized.
Denver saw a 2.2 percent drop in violent crime rates in the year after the first legal recreational cannabis sales in Colorado. Overall property crime dropped by 8.9 percent [PDF] in the same period there, according to figures from the Drug Policy Alliance. In Washington, violent crime rates dropped by 10 percent [PDF] from 2011 to 2014. Voters legalized recreational marijuana there in 2012.
Medical marijuana laws, which have a longer track record for academics than recreational pot legalization, are also associated with stable or falling violent crime rates. In one 2014 study of the 11 states that legalized medical pot from 1990 to 2006, there was no increase in the seven major categories of violent crime and "some evidence of decreasing rates of some types of violent crime, namely homicide and assault."
[...] Elsewhere in his remarks, Sessions unwittingly made the case against treating pot activity like serious crime. "You can't sue somebody for drug debt". he said. "The only way to get your money is through strong-arm tactics, and violence tends to follow that."
Legalizing, regulating, and taxing the sale of marijuana is the surest way to remedying that exact tendency for pot commerce to trigger violent score-settling. Legalization invites pot business into the light, granting cannabusinesses at least partial access to official modes of recourse when they are defrauded.
8 states and the District of Columbia have legalised marijuana for recreational use.
Ever see anyone use cannabis and become more aggressive rather than more mellow?
Note: ThinkProgress redirects all accesses of their pages and will attach tracking numbers. I have made sure that those are not in the URLs.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:04PM (16 children)
Schumer calls for Sessions to resign [thehill.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:14PM (6 children)
Sessions lied, under oath, to Congress AKA perjury. Weren't Republicans all about perjury? Up until yesterday, at least...
Not really off topic...
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:37PM (2 children)
> Weren't Republicans all about perjury? Up until yesterday, at least...
He wasn't the first of Trump's cabinet to lie under oath during confirmation.
If anything, it seems to be something they all did.
Trump Education Nominee Betsy DeVos Lied to the Senate [theintercept.com]
Mnuchin Lied About His Bank’s History of Robo-Signing Foreclosure Documents [theintercept.com]
Trump EPA pick Scott Pruitt may have made a false statement under oath to the Senate [businessinsider.com]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:42PM (1 child)
Hypocritical Perjurer Jeff Sessions said this about Bill Clinton:
It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that President William Jefferson Clinton perjured himself before a federal grand jury and has persisted in a continuous pattern of lying and obstructing justice. The chief law enforcement officer of the land, whose oath of office calls on him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, crossed the line and failed to defend and protect the law and, in fact, attacked the law and the rights of a fellow citizen. Under our Constitution, equal justice requires that he forfeit his office. For these reasons, I felt compelled to vote to convict and remove the President from office. ...
It is crucial to our system of justice that we demand the truth. I fear that an acquittal of this president will weaken the legal system by providing an option for those who consider being less than truthful in court. Whereas the handling of the case against President Nixon clearly strengthened the nation's respect for law, justice and truth, the Clinton impeachment may unfortunately have the opposite result.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Thursday March 02 2017, @07:09PM
Well he called it! "The perjury isn't my fault, someone gave me that idea! They gave it to me, I didn't know it was the illegal type of perjury."
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:33PM (2 children)
Perhaps you have a short memory, or are just too young to remember.
When Bill Clinton was under threat of impeachment, there was possibly a valid reason: perjury. However, the Republicans could only talk about Clinton having sex in the Oval Office, which was entirely legal.
I lost any respect that I had for the Republicans when I realized that all they cared about was someone else having sex.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:43PM (1 child)
they have shown that because they aligned with 'the good book' about 30 yrs ago and that their READ of the so-called good book means that any pleasure is a sin, they rally against all things that are not already on the 'white list' (see what I did there?) and that let people enjoy themselves.
this is a huge problem with the R's. they seem to be stuck in the period about 400 yrs ago, when the US had more religious crazies than all of europe put together. in fact, the puritans and pilgrams were the local crazies in europe and europe was glad to let them leave!
remove the influence and mind control that big religion has and, all of a sudden, more liberty ensues. imagine that!
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03 2017, @12:53AM
> remove the influence and mind control that big religion has and, all of a sudden, more liberty ensues. imagine that!
If the US was populated by the crazies who migrated out of europe, then why did the US become all about freedom when places like france fucked up their revolution?
My point is, your history of the US and liberty is not internally self-consistent. Better work on it some more.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:41PM (1 child)
Other than that, it was relevant.
"There cannot be even a scintilla of doubt about the impartiality and fairness of the attorney general, the top law enforcement official of the land", Schumer told reporters
There was a recent dust-up in the senate when Elizabeth Warren attempted to read a letter written by Coretta Scott King, widow of Martin Luther King, Jr.
The presiding officer of the Senate claimed that the historic document violated a senate rule which prohibits one member from speaking ill of another member and that reading it was out of order.
At the time, the senate was discussing the qualification (or not) of Sessions to be Attorney General.
The letter had been written to the senate in 1986, regarding the nomination of Sessions to be a federal judge.
It documented his bigotry and lack of impartiality.
That nomination in 1986 was subsequently rejected.
OBTW, several male senators read portions of the document later on the senate floor and none of them were censured.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:44PM
n/t
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:45PM (6 children)
Come on you hypocrites, you jump all over some inflammatory post calling out the Trump administration, but here you have some sourced commentary showing they are liars and cheats. So what do you say? Why should Trump NOT be impeached? Why should we not drain the swamp starting with him and his crony staff?
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 02 2017, @11:53PM
This place has a serious RWNJ infestation, that's why. I don't know what the fuck it is about male-dominated tech spaces but they seem to attract every amoral, overprivileged sociopath (and all the pathetic "me too if I kiss the boot that stomps on me long enough!") type on the 'net. I am beginning to understand the value of the humanities...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bobs on Friday March 03 2017, @02:51AM (3 children)
I am not a Trump fan.
Why should Trump NOT be impeached?
Trump has not done anything qualifying him for Impeachment. Yet. That we know of.
An investigation is mandatory and some are underway.
But calling for impeachment before any evidence of a crime is counter-productive. He is innocent until proven guilty, and as of yet there is not even any evidence he committed an impeachable offense.
What are the legal grounds for impeaching him?
Be patient - I am confident evidence will be found. Then call for his impeachment and I will jump on that bandwagon.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03 2017, @03:12AM (2 children)
Trump has not done anything qualifying him for Impeachment. Yet. That we know of.
He is 100% in violation of the foreign emoluments clause.
There is literally no question about it.
An "emolument" means any form of remuneration. Not just bribes, ANY payment.
See this well-documented analysis by Georgetown Law prof John Mikhail [georgetown.edu]
https://balkin.blogspot.com/2017/01/a-note-on-original-meaning-of-emolument.html [blogspot.com]
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday March 03 2017, @03:34PM (1 child)
Unfortunately nobody seems to be a strict constructionist anymore :P
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 04 2017, @06:23AM
> Unfortunately nobody seems to be a strict constructionist anymore
Strict constuctionism, or originalism, was always a myth. [vox.com] Just a way for judges to cherry-pick history for examples that confirmed their predetermined biases.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03 2017, @05:07AM
You seem awfully eager to have a President Pence.