1y ago

11 Democratic senators call on DEA to deschedule marijuana entirely

thehill.com

Democratic senators call on DEA to deschedule marijuana entirely

207 comments

Why are only 11 senators in support of this?
- Because the rest are old farts with reefer madness
  
  Of the 11 that signed, the average age is 65
  
  That's a good answer
- Because the DEA doesn't have the legal authority to do that. Congress laid out the criteria for scheduling drugs in the Controlled Substances Act and any reasonable person would say marijuana meets the criteria for at least schedule 5. Congress needs to do what they did for alcohol and nicotine and pass a law that specifically excludes marijuana.
- 12 signed it, headline ignores Bernie
  
  Common Bernie Sanders W
- I assume most are for rescheduling, or respecting state's choice, or maybe they're more concerned with systemic inequality and foreign genocide with US armaments.
  Also, though, the Biden Administration has been pushing for the DEA to reschedule marijuana for like 3 years...
  
  more concerned with systemic inequality and foreign genocide
  ...what in this prevents them from doing their job and actually forwarding a pretty objectively good bill?
  
  or respecting state’s choice
  I'd love to hear the logic of how federal descheduling takes away a states choice...
  
  Descheduling is respecting the states' choices. Legalization at the national level doesn't automatically make it legal in states.
Elizabeth Warren (Mass.),
John Fetterman (Pa.)
Chuck Schumer (N.Y.)
Cory Booker (N.J.)
Jeff Merkley (Ore.)
Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)
Ron Wyden (Ore.)
John Hickenlooper (Colo.)
Peter Welch (Vt.)
Chris Van Hollen (Md.)
Alex Padilla (Calif.).
Edit: and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
- 11 Democratic senators, along with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
  He already got left out of the headline
  
  And then I also left him out. Sorry Bernie!
- Surprised to not see Bernie on here
  
  He's there.
  In a letter addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland and DEA Administrator Anne Milgram, 11 Democratic senators, along with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), argued the administration “should deschedule marijuana altogether.”
  They could have said "12 Senators..."
  But went with the option that excluded Bernie since he's not a D.
  
  givesmefucks beat me to it. :)
What's the over/under on this happening before November?
- If election theater motivates this policy and makes this happen then I’m all for it. I wonder what our criminal AG in Texas thinks about all this, considering he’s trying to do the opposite in cities with lax marijuana enforcement.
  
  Even if marijuana was descheduled, it would still be illegal due to Texas state law
  I think most states in which it is illegal would remain illegal. Many states would probably update their laws in response to the DEA descheduling it.
  
  Biden does good thing
  Idiots: "He's only doing this to get votes!"
  Yeah, no shit sherlock, that's the whole point of the system.
- People play the lottery too.. so
- What's the likelihood a rock from space hits Trump in his diaper?
  
  Much lower considering rescheduling marijuana is a basic government act and not a ridiculously unlikely astronomical event. Also, it would gain Biden a lot of votes.
- Depends on if Biden thinks he can get the support he needs by just pretending to look into it some more.
Thats a minority of democratic senators.
- It's not like it's something the majority of Democratic senators support. Like genocide.
how evil, maybe one day people will understand that marijuana, along with all the other drugs that people seem to think aren't harmful despite having existed in our societies for 100 years, are a threat to individuals, the broader society, and deserve to be completely outlawed
- Got a list of books that need burning too?
  
  the one's that teach people that harmful substances are good lol, take your shite words and come back with an argument
- But alcohol is cool right? Tobacco?
  
  alcohol is because we've had it for thousands of years and it has been known to be fine when consumed in moderation (something 99% of people can do), whereas tobacco is not something that you can just "smoke on occasion", it is exclusively smoked either by those trying it for the first time, or by those who are hooked already (not to mention the fact that alcohol is much worse than tobacco over a lifetime regardless)
- Conorm is a troll account
- Well, you're completely wrong. On so many levels.
  First, the majority of other people don't obsess over finding things to be afraid of. You did not base your opinion on any kind of empirical evidence. You need something to be afraid of in other to justify your perspective, and drugs are an easy target. Second, with regards to hard drugs that do present a clear danger to the user, prohibition is not effective and never will be. Addiction is a medical issue. Criminalization denies the victim any realistic chance of rehabilitation, not to mention penalizing them in specific ways that will only be likely to increase their likelihood of abusing drugs in the future.
  Way to broadcast your lack of empathy for your fellow man
  
  sorry but you're wrong
- If we are going to start outlawing things that could, in some very vague and abstract way, be considered "harmful", then we would have to start banning many more things than just low-level drugs.
  Cannabis is a natural plant that has existed throughout the entirety of human history. Medicine to some, religion to others, recreation and inspiration for the rest. Likewise, cannabinoids are a natural chemical compound that can be found naturally in your body and the body of most living things on Earth. Cannabis makes us feel good because it just so happens to contain the same kinds of cannabinoids that our body produces, which also make us feel good.
  Cannabis might be addictive in the same way that anything pleasurable is addictive. But you don't see people dying of cannabis overdoses, nor do you see people winding up on the streets with crippling cannabis addictions that overwhelm their entire life.
  It's a safe, natural, and mild high, and there has never been any good reason for it to be illegal.
  edit: Oh, he's just a troll. Whatever.
  
  I'm all in favor of legalizing weed, and in fact I would like to abolish the prescription system in it's entirety, however, I do think that the rhetoric of pro-weed ppl treats it like it's entirely harmless, which is a dangerous sentiment.
  I went through some serious symptoms from long term use. The hemispheres of my brain split into 2 different ppl, my body's sense of propioception got all fucked up, and I threw up a whole lot. Not fun. And my memory basically was shot from use, that lasted even after I stopped using. I originally started bc I couldn't afford to see a psychiatrist and I needed antidepressants, it was the closest thing I could get (abolish the fking prescription system). I had no idea that it had any long term effects, the way ppl talk you think it's only good. I mean I'm sure everyone's different, but ppl at least need a warning abt that sort of shit.
- Weak bait
  
  that's a cool comment, unfortunately you took the time out of your day to respond
- Gr8 b8 m8. I r8, 8/8
- As opposed to the myriad of harmful substances that are legal?
  
  No need for whataboutism here, the original statement you're replying to is already demonstrably false. You can easily address their actual argument.

207 comments