
US to end policy that let legal pot flourish - runesoerensen
https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa
======
ams6110
I'm not a person who would encourage marijuana (or other intoxicant) use, but
the federal government should absolutely be letting the states set policy on
that.

While this is not new policy (it only removes some conditions established by
the previous administration) this is an example of the sort of federal
overreach that real conservatives and libertarians reject.

For those who support heavy federal government involvement in healthcare and
other social programs, this is an example of the downside of that approach.

~~~
rabboRubble
Problem is, not all marijuana products are intoxicating, see cannabidiol (CBD)
and industrial hemp. You could actively encourage CBD and hemp ropes use
without also encouraging intoxication. Unfortunately, federal law treats CBDs
on par with heroin. I've taken CBD when I threw out my back and I can attest
the only affect it had on me was the reduced use of ibuprofen and reduced
stomach irritation from the ibu.

The federal government is truly deranged when it comes to drug policy in
general and marijuana specifically.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol)

------
justboxing
Active Discussion =>
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16070516](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16070516)

------
e40
Sessions doesn't want to lose one tool in his belt to use against black
people. The root of this is refer madness from the last century, where white
men thought marijuana would make white women sleep with black men.

~~~
urmish
How is this allowed on HN?

~~~
quasse
This is how:

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-d...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-
drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues/#22a1a2dd42c8)

From John Ehrlichman, counsel and Assistant to the President for Domestic
Affairs under Nixon:

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two
enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We
knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by
getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with
heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those
communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their
meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know
we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

~~~
gravy
This only makes it _even less_ appropriate than that comment and the OP.

 _Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they 're
evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Ideological or political battle
or talking points. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures.
If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic._

~~~
Jtsummers
You should note that that is from the "What to submit" section, which has no
bearing on comments. In that regard this whole submission may be off-topic,
but comments on a submission are inherently on-topic.

But also see:

    
    
      Please don't complain that a submission is
      inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag
      it. Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag
      them instead. If you flag something, please don't also
      comment that you did.
    

Just flag and go away from the submission.

