Denver oks Marijuana possesionin a referendum, possesing small amounts of pot is now legal in Denver.
Denver property values just went up.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- getting high in the mile high city
getting high in the mile high cityFollow
No, no it isn't. State law takes precendence over local ordinance, just as federal law takes precedence over state.
Doesn't matter how many different laws there are legalizing it on a local or state level, when the feds say no, the answer is no.
I seem to recall a precedent involving the legalization of owning other people. Federal gov't said no, state gov'ts said yes. A bunch of states decided not to listen to the federal government and got their collective asses handed to them in a long and costly tussle.
It's no fun when they send in soldiers to enforce the law; I'm amazed that so many assclowns forget that it can and HAS happened right here in the good ole US of A.
I'm not against legalization of marijuana. I'm in favor of it, despite the fact that I don't partake. My reasons are economic. However, this is something that has to be legalized federally before it can be legalized on a local or state level.
Doesn't matter how many different laws there are legalizing it on a local or state level, when the feds say no, the answer is no.
I seem to recall a precedent involving the legalization of owning other people. Federal gov't said no, state gov'ts said yes. A bunch of states decided not to listen to the federal government and got their collective asses handed to them in a long and costly tussle.
It's no fun when they send in soldiers to enforce the law; I'm amazed that so many assclowns forget that it can and HAS happened right here in the good ole US of A.
I'm not against legalization of marijuana. I'm in favor of it, despite the fact that I don't partake. My reasons are economic. However, this is something that has to be legalized federally before it can be legalized on a local or state level.
I wonder what they're trying to accomplish other than setting a precedent or whatever.
Would this mean if a local police officer pulled you over and you had a joint on you they couldn't do anything? Is it the job of the local police to enforce federal or state laws? If so, then this really is a waste of time I imagine.
Would this mean if a local police officer pulled you over and you had a joint on you they couldn't do anything? Is it the job of the local police to enforce federal or state laws? If so, then this really is a waste of time I imagine.
Quote:
Is it the job of the local police to enforce federal or state laws? If so, then this really is a waste of time I imagine.
IIRC, local police are usually empowered to enforce most state criminal codes, though they may also have the authority to enforce additional local ordinances. Usually federal laws aren't leaned on for things that a local policeman would arrest you for, even if there are mirror statutes on the books.
Occasionally, it does happen where an individual is prosecuted for several different laws spanning the federal state and local levels of jurisdiction. I remember hearing about that when I was a kid and thinking how much bull it was...double jeopardy and all that.
It IS a waste of time to legalize something locally when it's illegal nationally. They may as well revoke Federal income tax for their locality while they're at it. The poor stoners are a bit muddled if you ask me.
me tipe gud
Edited, Wed Nov 2 13:13:14 2005 by TStephens
TStephens wrote:
It IS a waste of time to legalize something locally when it's illegal nationally. They may as well revoke Federal income tax for their locality while they're at it. The poor stoners are a bit muddled if you ask me.
Not technically correct though. In actual fact, the local laws have precidence unless there is an opposing state law, and the state law has precidence unless there is an opposing federal law. There's a subtle difference though. All things not legistlated at a higher level are assumed to be governed at the lower level.
In this case, it's a bit more muddled because there isn't really a federal law "illegalizing" marijuana. There is a federal law governing controlled substances. And there are federal standards that place marijuana in a particular catagory of controlled substances. Those standards are then used in state laws to set penalties for violations of those standards. Federal law in this case only involves the transportation of controlled substances across state or federal boundaries. I don't believe there is *any* federal law that makes it illegal to possess or smoke pot. Just federal standards that classify it as a class whatever material, and most states follow those standards by illegalizing the possession, use, and sale of those materials (often as a requirement for various federal funding programs).
I also wouldn't say it's pointless to pass a local ordinance in violation of a state or federal law. The point is to challenge those laws in some way. If it's legal locally and illegal at the state level, that automatically grants you a pass to the state supreme court since you have two laws in opposition to eachother. This ensures that the issue is addressed. Without doing that, the laws are never challenged and will remain forever...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Quote:
I also wouldn't say it's pointless to pass a local ordinance in violation of a state or federal law. The point is to challenge those laws in some way. If it's legal locally and illegal at the state level, that automatically grants you a pass to the state supreme court since you have two laws in opposition to eachother. This ensures that the issue is addressed. Without doing that, the laws are never challenged and will remain forever...
Indeed, while many precidents have been set historically favoring the heirarchy of fed > state > local, it at least opens the door to challenges.
If no laws contradict one another, and your found guilty, there's pretty much nowhere to go from there.
Kofi Anan wrote:
Ph34r M3!
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Ladies und Gentalmen,
Welcome to Amerijuana!
Welcome to Amerijuana!
Regardless of a decriminalization, they could and would just as easily charge you under the state statute (I saw something to this effect said by a Denver local official). Even if voted through by referendum, you could easily goto jail if you decide to preach your rights, act like a dic[/i]k etc.
I live in Madison, WI, where it is decriminalized in our city. I have been caught twice with both a small amount of marijuana (1 gram or less) and a pipe. I recieved a ticket on both occasions for the marijuana ($100) and a citation with a misdemeanor charge for the pipe. Now I see that as fuc[i]ked up. Regardless, it was stupid for me to get caught with those things on me, but you'd expect to get in trouble for having the drug, not the means to use the drug.
Until marijuana is removed as a class 1 controlled substance, local laws are just going to be little annoyance to the federal government. It is them that truly need to be fought on this issue. As long as they continue to prosecute for medical use and casual use, no one is really safe that uses.
I live in Madison, WI, where it is decriminalized in our city. I have been caught twice with both a small amount of marijuana (1 gram or less) and a pipe. I recieved a ticket on both occasions for the marijuana ($100) and a citation with a misdemeanor charge for the pipe. Now I see that as fuc[i]ked up. Regardless, it was stupid for me to get caught with those things on me, but you'd expect to get in trouble for having the drug, not the means to use the drug.
Until marijuana is removed as a class 1 controlled substance, local laws are just going to be little annoyance to the federal government. It is them that truly need to be fought on this issue. As long as they continue to prosecute for medical use and casual use, no one is really safe that uses.
Recent Visitors: 247
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (247)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- getting high in the mile high city
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC