Lemmy sucks. You're whiney fucks. Enjoy the win. Both sides are not the same. This is an unfathomable event previously. Anyone remember Jeff Sessions first months in office? Stop bitching and show some fucking gratitude. Thousands of people are being pardoned. Is it perfect and everything we want? No. Does that take away from the achievement? No.
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
979 points (98.1% liked)
politics
19097 readers
2961 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Purity tests all the way down and it's why populism never actually works. You can't be happy, even a little bit, about incremental progress if the "real problem" hasn't been dealt with. That problem will always be broad and impossible to truly achieve outside of theory. You end up with an ideology just centered around anger and despair.
People who do this shit maintain positions they know are practically unworkable because the thing they fear most is actually having to govern and make difficult choices in the real world and then answer for the consequences of those decisions. It's much easier to just loudly state a preference for fantasy.
load more comments
(5 replies)
"Lemmy sucks."
You are top comment. I always hated this "reddit sucks" attitude that everyone always adopted, especially when taking the most common and popular opinions on the platform.
load more comments
(3 replies)
There are a lot of right wing Poe's law trolls here pretending to be leftists, and a handful of people who get caught up in their privileged contrarian virtue. It's shocking to me that this isn't extremely obvious to more people here.
I think there's also a lot of far left people here accusing left people to be right wing.
For sure. Actual leftists often criticize the Dems, because the Dems aren't leftist. They are mostly just centrists and they are in bed with Corporate America. That being said, I don't understand why some people have to criticize every little thing. I have been pretty critical of the Democratic party, myself, as a self identifying Socialist (begrudgingly still vote for them, because the other 1 option is way worse). These pardons are a good thing, though, and I don't see what the problem is for some people.
Some extreme leftists just turn into such contrarians that they end up sounding the same as right wing fear mongerers. It's like the political spectrum is a circle, with both of the left and right ends meeting up in a bubble of authoritarianism and hate.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(23 replies)
Cool. Now stop allowing companies with federal contracts to do drug testing for cannabis unless they also test for alcohol.
Also stop requiring marijuana be tested for security clearances for your own employees.
You had me at stop testing for cannabis.
I get what you're saying, but if you are, for instance, a heavy machinery operator, it is worth making sure you are not using substances that could potentially impair your judgment. Those people usually are tested for alcohol, which is why I find it acceptable.
I think the primary difference here is that Marijuana tests detect thc going back months and months while alcohol is a much shorter duration. When those people are tested for alcohol, is that to stop them from being actually drunk on the job or to actually forbid them from drinking at any point while they're employed?
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
This could, conceivably, be the hold up at federal level tbh. We have no current means by which we can objectively test for active impairment caused by THC...
Testing for alcohol is rare, and incident specific, because it's a measure of actual impairment. You aren't tested for alcohol to see if you've had a beer in the last 30 days, you're being tested to see if it's dangerous for you to be operating a vehicle, provide healthcare, carry a gun...
The basic principle behind alcohol testing is to determine actual impairment. The premise is that an agency is protecting others from dangers inherent in your being impaired.
The basic principle of drug testing is that the same danger from impairment is prevented by preventing impairment, but the premise is that any use is illegal. It's a "just in case" premise vs an actual matter of being presently impaired.
That fundamental difference is hugely notable in the case of DUI. How exactly do you mitigate the risk of DUI with THC? The current arguments in favor of legalization trend towards "it doesn't impair people as much", but that's a total cop out that doesn't address the issue, exactly the same way prohibition is.
We seriously need a solution to that, and I suspect it could very well be the "mystery cause" of federal legislators on the liberal side dragging their feet. They don't want to open the floodgates and make it unprosecutable to get in your car impaired, because even with an easy means to prosecute that if alcohol is the cause, it's still a huge issue... How bad will it be if it's effectively undetectable?
You want cops deciding based on how well you perform the little monkey dance? I fucking don't. I can't dance for shit perfectly sober...
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Just legalize marijuana at the federal level and admit the "war on drugs" is lost and was lost before it even started. That it really was yet another racist policy and the government is really really sorry for being shitty, again.
Even if they don't admit they were wrong, they can demonstrate it. Legalize mj, at a minimum (maybe let's do psychedelics next so those of us with mental health disorders can get some promising treatment some day soon). Pardon all people convicted of possession of said drugs. Set up a national program for addiction treatment. Hell while I am at it let's socialize mental healthcare. And establish UBI. I could go on...
the government is really really sorry
What gives you that impression? They aren't sorry, they're upset people said "fuck you" just like prohibition.
They're saying the government should walk it back and at least pay the lip service to that effect.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Gramps should legalize it.
If only to take the carrot away from the libertarians.
That requires federal legislation.
Biden is bound by the Controlled Substances Act, same as anyone else.
It doesn’t require federal legislation actually. Biden could simply order the AG to deschedule marijuana which would effectively legalize it nationally.
The United States Code, under Section 811 of Title 21,[24] sets out a process by which cannabis could be administratively transferred to a less-restrictive category or removed from Controlled Substances Act regulation altogether. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) evaluates petitions to reschedule cannabis. However, the Controlled Substances Act gives the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), as successor agency of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, great power over rescheduling decisions.
After the DEA accepts the filing of a petition, the agency must request from the HHS Secretary "a scientific and medical evaluation, and his recommendations, as to whether such drug or other substance should be so controlled or removed as a controlled substance." The Secretary's findings on scientific and medical issues are binding on the DEA.[25] The HHS Secretary can even unilaterally legalize cannabis: "[I]f the Secretary recommends that a drug or other substance not be controlled, the Attorney General shall not control the drug or other substance." 21 U.S.C. § 811(b).
Biden could theoretically pressure the HHS secretary to do that, but that would directly be a Trumpian act of a guy who ran on "look how not-Trump I am" and just is not going to happen.
Biden will use the system, as designed, and hope the chips land his way. If they don't, and public backlash is strong, Dems can safely run on it.
We can not like how the political sausage is made, or even like that said sausage is made, and still live in the reality in which one does have to make sausage in politics.
Maybe if the world didn't catch fire right before his election, this could be a thing, but with the past four to six years I just don't see it taking anything but an act of Congress
load more comments
(12 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
No one was freed from prison under last year’s action, no federal prisoners are eligible for release as a result of Friday’s pardon. But the order expands the grounds on which pardons are issued, which they can use to build the groundwork for a fundement to layer the different levels that they can then use as a foundation to build upon. However this might take some time. In the meantime please be patient.
Wish we could get this over with and just legalize it. The attitudes with it have changed. The majority want it treated like alcohol.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I hate the emphasis of "simple possession charges", like there aren't situations where someone gets charged with multiple misdemeanors or other petty crimes while carrying an 8th. When Minnesota legalized this year they went the route of "simple possession" for pardons and exoneration, only about 3 people had their sentences ended. To me that indicates they're afraid of being labeled "weak on crime" instead of doing the right thing.
People need to learn "tough on crime" and "law and order" are dog whistles for "oppress minorities"
A lot of people already know, and that's exactly why they support it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
If you commit another crime while possessing, you'll be charged with said crime and possession.
You should still be cleared of the possesion charge, while staying locked up for whatever else you might have done.
What if you get nailed for possession then they find a bunch of other shit to charge you with. I assume that happens anyway. If weed was the basis of probable cause, throw out the conviction for the other stuff.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
This is a good second step. The first was asking the DEA to look into rescheduling.
But it is nothing more than the second step. The third step would probably be to pass the SAFE Banking act. And we should not let up pressure until full recreational legalization is a reality in all states.
Democrats will happily let this be the end of reforms if we let them.
load more comments
(2 replies)
President Joe Biden pardoned thousands of people who were convicted of use and simple possession of marijuana on federal lands and in the District of Columbia
So that pardons people who were convicted of using or possessing while located in one of the red areas here?
Aside from D.C. itself, that's what, Land under the control of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of Defense, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Tennessee Valley Authority, and a few others?
I guess, in the words of Angie Martinelli "That's not nothin!".
Hopefully this reaches the right ears and starts more change:
Biden on Friday reiterated his call on governors and local leaders to take similar steps to erase marijuana convictions.
The number of people we have in prison for this is bonkers and the fact that it makes life as a productive member of society much more difficult is absolutely ridiculous.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Things that should have been done day one of things that never should have happened.
I agree it never should have happened but unfortunately that's the nature of fixing the mistakes of the past
load more comments
(7 replies)
A small step but hopefully a step towards legalisation.
This is Soros-funded Alinsky-style tactics to bring about the Marxist state!!!!1111ELEVENTYONE111 -wingers, probably.
Great! But let’s also pardon sellers. it was illegal to buy and sell, but only buyers get pardoned? pardon buyers and sellers, and let sellers open up their own pot shops. or, are we not a meritocracy? (obviously we are not and this is a great first step but it isn’t all sunshine and rainbows). You’re all going to vote Biden anyway because not doing so means you voted for trump. y’all are smarter than that.
load more comments
(5 replies)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden is pardoning thousands of people who were convicted of use and simple possession of marijuana on federal lands and in the District of Columbia, the White House said Friday, in his latest round of executive clemencies meant to rectify racial disparities in the justice system.
Biden is also granting clemency to 11 people serving what the White House called “disproportionately long” sentences for nonviolent drug offenses.
Biden said his actions would help make the “promise of equal justice a reality.”
“Criminal records for marijuana use and possession have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities,” Biden said.
The White House said thousands more would be eligible under Friday’s action.
Biden reiterated his call on governors and local leaders to take similar steps to erase marijuana convictions.
The original article contains 220 words, the summary contains 134 words. Saved 39%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›