Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
  1. #21
    slavery was outlawed in areas way before the civil war, unfortunatly the economy of the south was dependent upon it and people were afraid to mess with it because of that.
    Jay Shrewsbury
    Hidden Content

  2. #22


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,381
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    The precedent of states going against what the Fed says is not unheard of. Fed laws says that marijuana is a controlled substance and it is illegal to possess or use it, yet we just had the population of Colorado and Washington vote to pass laws that make it legal to possess and use in your home for recreational purposes.
    Yes. But in reality, it's still an illegal narcotic because it's a class 1 (highest or "worst" level) narcotic federally. The fact that people can buy and smoke marijuana in those two states relies completely on two things:
    1: Local law enforcement respecting state law more than federal.
    2: The feds not going after marijuana users in those two states.

    Obama has been fairly clear about his position on this issue. Any state that votes to legalize marijuana will not have the feds going after marijuana users, but officially, that means nothing. He could change his mind tomorrow. The next guy could go on a rampage in any state that does legalize marijuana.

    Despite the fact that it's legal in Washington and Colorado, it's still illegal in the United States including Washington and Colorado. The states can make any laws they want, it doesn't trump federal law. Quite the opposite, in fact.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  3. #23
    Doesn't change the fact that the citizens voted in favor of something that the Fed says is illegal.

    1: Local law enforcement respecting state law more than federal.
    State law enforcement only works based on state law. State police can not file Federal charges, Federal indictments or prosecute based on Federal law.

    2: The feds not going after marijuana users in those two states.
    The Fed is dependent on information gathered by state law enforcement, so they will be limited based on that alone.
    Last edited by duane1969; 03-27-2013 at 02:51 PM.

    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content
    "Amidst the uncertainties of war, every soldier is entitled to one certainty...that he will not be forgotten.
    Poor is the nation that has no heroes, shameful is the one that, having them...forgets."


  4. #24


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,381
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    Doesn't change the fact that the citizens voted in favor of something that the Fed says is illegal.
    And that doesn't change the fact that, under your system of law, federal law trumps state law. California legalized medicinal marijuana and police kept arresting people in possession, just not every cop and not every user with a licence that's valid in California, but not the US.


    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    State law enforcement only works based on state law. State police can not file Federal charges, Federal indictments or prosecute based on Federal law.
    You're absolutely right. Jusrisdiction is a HUGE part of why people aren't getting arrested. The feds have said they won't bother in those states. Again, a new President could change that. The current President could change his mind. If that happens, federal law enforcement still has every right to go in and arrest people breaking federal law. Right now federal law says marijuana is illegal. The legalization still depends entirely on the attitude of the current administration at any given time because at any given time they can come in and arrest people on federal charges, even if they're not breaking state law.

    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    The Fed is dependent on information gathered by state law enforcement, so they will be limited based on that alone.
    Yes they will, unless the system of gathering information changes. The feds can gather their own information and can arrest users in those states based on that information. Just because they currently don't doesn't mean it isn't possible under law. Maybe it's such a large undertaking that it will never realistically happen, but your system allows for it and because of that it's obvious that marijuana is still illegal in those states because it's illegal in all states, federally speaking.

    Federal trumps state. Laws that are dependant on certain people looking the other way aren't laws, they're understandings.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  5. #25
    I don't disagree that Fed law trumps state law, but you questioned if states would vote to go against a Fed law or ruling. Colorado and Washington are a clear example that they will.

    I should ad that you questioned if it is a states right to go against the Constitution, gay marriage will not be Constitutional law or a Constitutional right. It would be a SC decision that can be challenged and most likely will be challenged for many, many years to come. You mentioned Roe v. Wade, that was 40 years ago and we still have challenges to it all the time. The SC deciding that gay marriage is legal will not change much in my opinion.

    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content
    "Amidst the uncertainties of war, every soldier is entitled to one certainty...that he will not be forgotten.
    Poor is the nation that has no heroes, shameful is the one that, having them...forgets."


  6. #26


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,381
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    I don't disagree that Fed law trumps state law, but you questioned if states would vote to go against a Fed law or ruling. Colorado and Washington are a clear example that they will.
    No, I asked if they have the right to go against the constitution, not federal law. If SCOTUS finds that denying gay marriage is unconstitutional, how can you argue that individual states can deny gay marriage? That's unconstitutional, if SCOTUS decides so. That's what they do. They can change their minds later and hear new arguments, but as long as a ruling is standing, it's constitutional. Government, state or federal, can dream up and pass any insane laws they want. SCOTUS gets to decide if those laws are constitutional or "legal".
    I'll also add that there's nothing in your constitution about drug legislation, so this is all moot.


    Quote Originally Posted by duane1969 View Post
    I should ad that you questioned if it is a states right to go against the Constitution, gay marriage will not be Constitutional law or a Constitutional right. It would be a SC decision that can be challenged and most likely will be challenged for many, many years to come. You mentioned Roe v. Wade, that was 40 years ago and we still have challenges to it all the time. The SC deciding that gay marriage is legal will not change much in my opinion.
    Yes, and things can change. As it stands now, abortion is constitutional and, therefor, legal. Does that mean it's actually constitutional? No idea, but it does mean no one has come up with an argument calling abortion bans constitutional.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  7. #27
    I'm so sick and tired of hearing about states rights in regard to something that SHOULD be a Human right's issue.

    The States should NOT be able to vote on anything regarding marriage...

    Just like the States should NOT be able to vote on whether or not interracial marriage should be legal or not.

    This is NOT hard.

    The Federal government SHOULD step in and say that marriage is an EQUAL right to all Americans regardless of race, nationality, ethnicity, and GENDER!
    "Islam is the mother load of bad ideas" -Sam Harris

    "Christianity is a close second" -Me

  8. #28


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,381
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by JustAlex View Post
    I'm so sick and tired of hearing about states rights in regard to something that SHOULD be a Human right's issue.

    The States should NOT be able to vote on anything regarding marriage...

    Just like the States should NOT be able to vote on whether or not interracial marriage should be legal or not.

    This is NOT hard.

    The Federal government SHOULD step in and say that marriage is an EQUAL right to all Americans regardless of race, nationality, ethnicity, and GENDER!
    Umm...I thought that's what the past two days have been about.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    Umm...I thought that's what the past two days have been about.
    Yes, in the short run, we are talking about state's rights.....because at the moment we are not acknowledging that marriage should be a human right's issue.

    One step at a time I guess...

    But it's frustrating to know that even if gay rights win BOTH cases, the only thing it will do is say that gay marriage is legal....but on a state to state basis.

    I personally believe it should be enacted at the federal level....just like civil rights were.
    "Islam is the mother load of bad ideas" -Sam Harris

    "Christianity is a close second" -Me

  10. #30
    Also, think about it like this...

    Let's say DOMA is struck down by the SCOTUS (which most legal experts say it will).....basically, what SCOTUS will be saying is that the federal government can NOT discriminate on gay marriage, but at the same time, the states can?

    So, gay marriage will be legal with full rights....FOR SOME, not for all.

    Hard line conservative states like....oh I don't know the whole darn SOUTH....will continue to discriminate hiding under the guise of "traditional marriage" and religion.

    I just hope that this is the first step...

    The next step will be to make marriage a CONSTITUTIONAL issue.

    Make an amendment to the U.S constitution that says that marriage is a RIGHT granted to all Americans regardless of gender.
    "Islam is the mother load of bad ideas" -Sam Harris

    "Christianity is a close second" -Me

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •