Dianne Feinstein officially opposes pot legalization in California

[Associate Justice PiT]

The status quo on Marijuana is intolerable and there ought to be some kind of legalization, but the outrage on this thread is excessive.

     We don't agree on much, but I must concur with this. She's one member of the Senate, who isn't going to have much input on the legalization of marijuana. It's just not a big deal that she came out against pot.

[Intell]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

[ElectionsGuy]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

[Intell]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

I don't see how legislation helps, you can just make a law, that people who smoke pot cannot be placed in jail. This just allows marijuana dealers to thrive and ruin more people's lives.

[IceSpear]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

That can be solved by decriminalization though, not necessarily legalization.

I'd vote yes on legalization if it was on the ballot, but I really couldn't care less either way. Decriminalization is the much higher priority in my mind.

[Santander]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

[This account no longer in use.]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Empty quote if you cry everytime

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

And have no effect on you whatsoever.

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

I don't see how legislation helps, you can just make a law, that people who smoke pot cannot be placed in jail. This just allows marijuana dealers to thrive and ruin more people's lives.

Oh, really?  Like the lives of so many Coloradans have been "ruined" by those nasty marijuana shops?

You are the worst bootlicker, you know?

The status quo on Marijuana is intolerable and there ought to be some kind of legalization, but the outrage on this thread is excessive.

     We don't agree on much, but I must concur with this. She's one member of the Senate, who isn't going to have much input on the legalization of marijuana. It's just not a big deal that she came out against pot.

Feinstein's not just wrong on marijuana, though.  And who cares if she's one member of the Senate?  The drug warrior, police-worshipping mentality of this country ought to be challenged.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

It is of indisputable importance that marijuana be legalized, appropriated by the bourgeoisie, and summarily lose popularity among the types of losers who championed it for years.

[Mr. Smith]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

I don't see how legislation helps, you can just make a law, that people who smoke pot cannot be placed in jail. This just allows marijuana dealers to thrive and ruin more people's lives.

They thrive anyway, remember how well prohibition went? Oh yeah, like sh*t huh because of selective enforcement and awful rings like Al Capone.

This same crap happens with weed.

You want to take down the dealers, legally tax them to death and run the types of ads that used to discourage tobacco.

Actually,

It is of indisputable importance that marijuana be legalized, appropriated by the bourgeoisie, and summarily lose popularity among the types of losers who championed it for years.

this sums up things about right, and pretty much why DiFi is being counter-intuitive...as usual.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

That can be solved by decriminalization though, not necessarily legalization.

I'd vote yes on legalization if it was on the ballot, but I really couldn't care less either way. Decriminalization is the much higher priority in my mind.

But marijuana is already decriminalized in California, in order to deflate support at the last referendum a law was passed which makes it not punishable by anything but a citation and fine and a speeding ticket would likely give a bigger fine. Full legalization is the only step further you can take.

[Derpist]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

That can be solved by decriminalization though, not necessarily legalization.

I'd vote yes on legalization if it was on the ballot, but I really couldn't care less either way. Decriminalization is the much higher priority in my mind.

But marijuana is already decriminalized in California, in order to deflate support at the last referendum a law was passed which makes it not punishable by anything but a citation and fine and a speeding ticket would likely give a bigger fine. Full legalization is the only step further you can take.

People are generally almost never arrested solely for marijuana charges. Well, they used to. But not anymore. A pretty miniscule amount of people in jails are there only for marijuana. Typically, it's used the same way guns are. Ie, feds catch a guy dealing crack and then prosecutor piles on marijuana charges too.

Generally, I don't support anything prosecutors do, but legalizing pot doesn't change mass incarceration. That's just a weird myth put forward by millennials who get to combine their two pet political views (the cops are racist! and I want to get high!).

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

That can be solved by decriminalization though, not necessarily legalization.

I'd vote yes on legalization if it was on the ballot, but I really couldn't care less either way. Decriminalization is the much higher priority in my mind.

But marijuana is already decriminalized in California, in order to deflate support at the last referendum a law was passed which makes it not punishable by anything but a citation and fine and a speeding ticket would likely give a bigger fine. Full legalization is the only step further you can take.

People are generally almost never arrested solely for marijuana charges. Well, they used to. But not anymore. A pretty miniscule amount of people in jails are there only for marijuana. Typically, it's used the same way guns are. Ie, feds catch a guy dealing crack and then prosecutor piles on marijuana charges too.

According to the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), all drug-related charges have dropped by 23% on a judicial district level in Colorado since legalization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mindless drivel.

[Green Line]

Correlation does not equal causation.  What is the national rate?  It's true that weed has pretty much nothing to do with national incarceration levels.  It's a red herring.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thank God, for the democrats that stand up as against the libertarian orthodoxy. Pot does not need to be legalized, nor should it, this is essentially so some college kids can do whatever the f*k they want, and be stoners.

Its also so millions of non-violent people who are only doing harm to themselves aren't considered criminals anymore. But that's way less important than being able to do whatever the f**k people want.

I don't see how legislation helps, you can just make a law, that people who smoke pot cannot be placed in jail. This just allows marijuana dealers to thrive and ruin more people's lives.

I absolutely agree, but if the choice is between legalization and continuing to put people in jail for the crime of being addicted (as it sadly seems to be), then legalization is the least immoral option.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Because the War on Drugs and any other outlawing of any commodity has gone so well!

[Mr. Jew]

Feinstein is one of the most authoritarian senators, so this is sad, but not surprising.

The good people of California have the chance to elect a real progressive to replace her.

How's that a bad thing? The country would do better with more authoritarianism.

However, while the principle is admirable (which is rare for a corporatist like her), it is a missed opportunity to regulate like hell, demonize it, and stick it to all those "Stoners Against 19" people.

People, what the flower is wrong with young uns on here?

Gosh darn it,  the country does not need more authoritarianism.  I mean super bro, do you really think what we are sorely lacking in this country are even more stupid laws to throw people into jail for stupid reasons.  We got like millions of dudes in prison for the simple crime of lighting up a piece of green in their pipe.  How in a peck of pickled peppers are you going to say to somebody, stonefaced, "oh I see nothing wrong with that.  If anything we should arrest more people for even more insane brilliance.  Hey, that reminds me are there laws against briefly smelling gasoline as you fill up your car?  Yeah that would be a really good market if we want to reach the 20 million mark by March 2018."

Ahura Mazda.

[Santander]

I have to say, of the liberal Democrats in the Senate, I find myself agreeing with Feinstein fairly often.

Why the hell man?  What do you have against a good bit of 420?  Seriously, if you did pot regularly maybe you wouldn't be this uptight, angry, racist as hell person that you are.  You seem to have a lot of issues and take it out by blaming Mexicans, Moslems, blacks, upper class white progressives (okay, can't really hold that one against you), homosexuals, transgenders, and that one girl who wouldn't blow you on prom night for the problems in this country.  Just go to downtown Louisville and ask for Skillet.  He'll fix you up, mannnnnn.

Yes, I am the anti-gay person here.

[Mr. Jew]

Can we please for f**k's sake stop referring to "fiscally liberal but socially conservative" (unlike you lol) politicians as "authoritarian"? That's not what the word means or how it has ever been used by anyone worth listening.

Fine,  "all nanny-statist, all the time" then.

Also it'd be incorrect to describe either Feinstein or Michael Bloomberg (the two most prominent politicians of this breed) as "socially conservative".

I like this guy.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I thought pot was supposed to help people chill out. Then why are you so worked up?

[Mr. Jew]

I thought pot was supposed to help people chill out. Then why are you so worked up?

Less worked up than this Santander mofo  bro.  He's worked up about them gays, dopers, and migrants all day long and all night long (judging by his posting history).  I'm not.  I'm just freaking paranoid some bible thumpers and nanny statists are out to get me with bs laws.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The status quo on Marijuana is intolerable and there ought to be some kind of legalization, but the outrage on this thread is excessive.

     We don't agree on much, but I must concur with this. She's one member of the Senate, who isn't going to have much input on the legalization of marijuana. It's just not a big deal that she came out against pot.

Feinstein's not just wrong on marijuana, though.  And who cares if she's one member of the Senate?  The drug warrior, police-worshipping mentality of this country ought to be challenged.

     Politician holds a view that isn't so great isn't the most threadworthy eventuality, is it now? I'm fine with challenging the authoritarian bent of many American politicians, but there are issues and instances where it makes more sense to take the people to task.

[Sbane]

About time she gets voted out.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I thought pot was supposed to help people chill out. Then why are you so worked up?

Less worked up than this Santander mofo  bro.  He's worked up about them gays, dopers, and migrants all day long and all night long (judging by his posting history).  I'm not.  I'm just freaking paranoid some bible thumpers and nanny statists are out to get me with bs laws.

Say what you want about Santander, but he sounds reasonably calm and balanced when he spews his drivel. You, on the other hand, sound like you're more on meth than on pot.

[rob in cal]

   Time for DF to retire and allow for a more modern day California Democrat to take her seat.  She achieved political prominence in the days of Breshnev, for Pete's sake.