Canada Asks Drug Makers to Stop Marketing Opioids

I am predidicting 20 years for the final domino to fall. In the mean time the dominoes will keep falling. It’s a process.

Trump could EO it tomorrow and reschedule the drug. Hell it’s been argued that a POTUS EO could render it legal completely. With a GOP Congress that absolutely has to get reelected, they wouldn’t even have the power to push back against it.

Obama could have done it, but he was a pussy.

Recessions spike the vice industry. Recessions also increase depression/anxiety/etc per capita (duh). If a recession doesn’t cause a GOP Congress to legalize MJ as a way to lower crime (since it always rises under a recession), combat the social woes, and boost federal revenues, Dems will do it when they regain control of Congress post recession start.

That’s patently false. The more places it’s legal, the more places it can be bought legally and taxed. My dealer doesn’t pay taxes. Per capita revenue will continue to increase with legalization until we hit a critical mass, but that’s probably over a decade away according to most of the financial analysis of the weed industry.

And you don’t need to believe me, there’s plenty of publicly traded. I welcome you to look for yourself.

I do. I’ve been a public advocate of legalizing weed for close to a decade. Every new reason just becomes another tool to combat the retardation of people’s stance on MJ.

Every now and then I run into a true believer, one that wants to bring back prohibition, but that’s super rare these days.

I’ve been hearing for decades now how dems will do it, and it still ain’t done

Dems are the nanny state and nanny’s don’t give their little chickadee’s what the little chickadee wants. They give you what They want you to have.

Where does that idea even come from? Not grilling you or anything, genuinely curious, because I just can’t connect the dots on that one.

2 Likes

If they’re a nanny state, why wouldn’t they want a more complicit (stoned) population?

To be fair, you really haven’t. Not from enough people to ever come close to a majority. Favoring MJ legalization > 50% hasn’t existed for decades

He’s a tribalist, a true believer. Faith not facts.

Executive Orders cannot trump federal law. An EO would do nothing, it’s a useless act against an established law that was challenged in the SCOTUS and won. Differente battle. It has to be won by Congress and signed by the president for change at the federal level.

To be accurate- Yes I did.

You weren’t even born in the Bush 1 years! How do you know what people I was talking to (getting high with) were saying?

I’m telling you, I was smoking dope with the president of NORML at a Greatful Dead show in 1994 talking about “yeah, Clinton will do it!”. Same shit in the run up for Obama and through both of his terms, and same when Hillary was running.

Percentages or majority are irrelevant to whether or not people were talking about it.

1 Like

An EO has the power to reschedule the drug instantly, and arguably legalize. Theres also the ability to pardon weed criminals.

Happy to agree to disagree here. Ive done an absurd amount more research than you on this and truth be told I’m not vested in educating you.

The popularity of legalizing weed is trackable over the years. I’m not saying nobody said Dems would do it. Just that they were naive about the level of support that existed. We have an easy majority now, and we’re seeing change. Direct cause and effect

Understood. I didn’t mean to say “nobody” was talking about it. Just that those that did clearly didn’t know how much public support existed, so they were talking out of their ass

Also this is adorable from the faith guy in the convo whose done no research on the topic

Yes. Why wouldn’t they?

1 Like

They would if they’re truly a nanny state. Doesn’t make sense to me to say “Dems don’t want you to have weed because nanny state.”

Easy, man. Not trying to take away from your current effort, just pointing out that the consensus you see now has been building for a long time.

Hold the phone… So you have done incredible research on matters of Consituational Law and have determined that an Executive Order has the power to directly contradict a U.S. law voted on by Congress, signed in to law by the sitting president and survived a legal challenge by the judicial branch?

Sorry, but no research I have done backs that up. Contrary to popular belief the executive branch cannot make up, nor override or contradict existing law based on an Executive Order.
If you do have evidence that an EO can directly contradict U.S. law you will have to prove it.

Your word is not good enough here. Nor is the proclamation that I am dumb and you are smart. That all may be true, but it does not prove EO’s can directly contradict existing U.S. law. I need you to prove it with facts and stuff.
Just use small words so my pea-brain can handle it…

I don’t mean to take away from what they accomplished. They didn’t have the internet or readily available polling data at their fingertips. The majority of people with any opinion on the matter were talking out of their ass.

Definitely. And given the skyrocketing approval for legalization that is being largely driven by cycling old people out of the population, it’s finally coming to fruition

Not saying your wrong, you just have to somehow prove and Executive Order can trump an existing, previously established U.S. law.

Please explain how that is possible, factually.

So, nanny state supporting individuals would see see legalization as another useful tool to placate the masses.

@Sloth you’re a smart guy. Can an Executive Order directly contradict an existing U.S. law?
Like say can the president write an EO to nullify or circumvent the 13th ammendment?
Or can the president write an EO to overturn Roe v. Wade?
Apparently, I don’t know what I am talking about and waaay to dumb to understand, but is it true? Do you know?

Yup

Ignorant of MJ law*. Didn’t say you were dumb. Feel free to quote where I did :smiley:

As I said above, absolutely no interest in convincing you of anything. More than happy to agree to disagree. Have a good night.

Edit: given the immediate pettiness, this seems to absolutely be the right move haha

There’s an absurd amount more if you’d like to do the digging

Are you compliant before you get what you want or after?

Its a nice way to flirt with a voting block, but once accomplished, that lever of power is gone. If pot legalization wasn’t being used in the way I believe, then why wasn’t it broadly decriminalized a long time ago?

The stigma of addiction, gateway drugs, ruining your future, the lack of medical uses, and overall support rates.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/05/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/%3Famp=1

Edit: also because my generation was not yet in sufficient numbers to control voting blocks