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: 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.