Nullification at Work

[mRx 16]

Nullification: Ballot Drive for Legal Pot in CA

When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.

While the media of late tends to focus on the new crop of states resisting DC with legislation on firearms and health care, they almost always miss, or ignore, what I consider to be some of the greatest and most effective state resistance to federal power – marijuana activism.

According to our friends at NORML, there are now 13 states who are openly resisting federal laws on medical marijuana. And now my home state of California is on the verge of taking it to the next level – full legalization.

According to a report in the SF Chronicle yesterday:

Two prominent East Bay marijuana advocates got clearance from the state today to try to put a pot-legalization initiative on the November 2010 California ballot.

This isn’t your run-of-the-mill “medical marijuana” bill – that’s already legal in CA. If approved by voters, the bill would:

allow anyone over 21 to possess or grow marijuana for personal use. It would allow each local government to decide whether to tax and regulate marijuana sales.

Any honest person reading the Constitution through the intent and understanding of the founders would recognize that the federal government has no delegated power to be involved in the marijuana issue, in any way.

Keep in mind, though, that the federal courts (and the DEA), don’t really care what the Constitution has to say about it. They’ve interpreted it in their own way, and have made it quite clear that they don’t recognize state marijuana laws as “valid.”

But, as we say here in California, thanks for your opinion, DC, we’ve got our own.

[john & jean 37]

maybe California will see another GOLD rush

[SuperDuper! 230]

maybe California will see another GOLD rush

You right. Dere's a lot of (green and purple) gold in dem dar hills.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

maybe California will see another GOLD rush

You right. Dere's a lot of (green and purple) gold in dem dar hills.

Personally I would like to see it considered the same as we consider alcohol. Tough penalties for driving under the influence and selling to children (or under 18 or 21, whatever) Spending $200 million per year for the war on marijuana when the stuff is available anywhere and easier to obtain that alcohol for people under 21 is ludicrous.

Personally I never tried it, never had a desire to but really couldn't care less if you smoke it on your deck, or in your basement. Stay off the roads when you are stoned, thank you. I DID excuse myself from jury one time for a marijuana case. The guy was a Viet nam vet, maybe in his 60's, owned a business and was busted for growing pot in his 10 acres for his own use. During jury selection I asked to see the judge ad told him that if this guy was not charged with selling or giving this stuff out or giving it to kids or driving while stoned, the jusdge could gorget any guilty verdict from me for what he did on his own property 16 miles out of town. Maybe I should have stayed. The guy got acquitted anyway. They could not prove he planted or cultivated the plants on the side of a mountain which happened to belong to him.

I think if tyhe Feds want to ban a naturally occuring plant, they should start with crabgrass! Maybe Kudzu

[john & jean 37]

maybe California will see another GOLD rush

You right. Dere's a lot of (green and purple) gold in dem dar hills.

Personally I would like to see it considered the same as we consider alcohol. Tough penalties for driving under the influence and selling to children (or under 18 or 21, whatever) Spending $200 million per year for the war on marijuana when the stuff is available anywhere and easier to obtain that alcohol for people under 21 is ludicrous.

Personally I never tried it, never had a desire to but really couldn't care less if you smoke it on your deck, or in your basement. Stay off the roads when you are stoned, thank you. I DID excuse myself from jury one time for a marijuana case. The guy was a Viet nam vet, maybe in his 60's, owned a business and was busted for growing pot in his 10 acres for his own use. During jury selection I asked to see the judge ad told him that if this guy was not charged with selling or giving this stuff out or giving it to kids or driving while stoned, the jusdge could gorget any guilty verdict from me for what he did on his own property 16 miles out of town. Maybe I should have stayed. The guy got acquitted anyway. They could not prove he planted or cultivated the plants on the side of a mountain which happened to belong to him.

I think if tyhe Feds want to ban a naturally occuring plant, they should start with crabgrass! Maybe Kudzu

haha, Gary if they ban crabgrass, I will be serving a lengthy sentence!!!!