Bout damn time

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
74 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
9 points
*

I’d argue the opposite in a lot of cases, but not all.

I’m more excited about the medical portion of re-classifying.

edit I thought you meant the effects not the effects, so I agree with you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

I thought you meant the effects not the effects

Not sure that edit is clearing anything up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I think they meant wrt the federal government.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

But less bad than Fentanyl and other C-IIs, it sounds like.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points
*

This would have been a baby step 10 years ago if we’re being generous. California’s medical marijuana program has been a legal gray area since 1996. So what we can expect federal legalization in another 20 years at this rate? If biden touts this on the campaign trail as an accomplishment I’m going to lose my god damn mind.

This is so long overdue it doesn’t deserve celebration, it deserves a “what took so long, this isnt even controversial”. If your partner/roommate has been telling you to do the dishes for 20 years and you finally wash some you don’t get to turn around and go “look at me, I did 20% of the dishes! aren’t I great!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

I mean, that’s a pretty slippery slope of logic you’re on. We should have addressed anthropogenic climate change in the 70s, but I’m not gonna poo-poo the progress we’ve made.

I know it sucks that so many things change on a generational scale instead of a year scale, but I was also pretty damn happy about all that institutional inertia slowing down the hard-right turn we took during Trump’s 1st term.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points
*

Being happy with too little too late is exactly why climate change is going be as catastrophic as it will be so I really don’t get how that makes your case. If biden wanted to he could have pressured the dea to deschedule cannabis completely. He didn’t. The DNC hates to lose one of the carrots from their stick.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Well, if you want faster change, you should probably stop blaming the lack of progress on the people who are trying to make changes and start blaming the people who block the changes

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points
*

That’s the problem, they’re not or barely trying. Descheduling cannabis was within reach of this administration, they chose not to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Our federal government always moves slowly and almost always is decades behind popular opinion, that’s not news. What is news is that someone did something, and that person is Joe Biden. Even if it’s long overdue, and even if it could be better, he acted on the opportunity to make it happen and that deserves credit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

That not how any of this works. Politics requires these kind of changes to move gradually. The states went first and showed that it can work, albeit with severe hampering from the federal government.

Now there seems to be a public support for the next step and this is to gear up to allow dispensaries to become federally legal, have bank accounts and such. The government can then also regulate it in therma of quality and safety.

We all see the damaging nature of alcohol so that comparison is always a bit strange imho.

So we agree this is overdue, we disagree how much of a milestone this step is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Porn is legal and it is hard to find a payment processor that won’t gouge you.

Puritan bullshit finds a way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The biggest thing this does imo is unlock the ability for federal research dollars to study marijuana. There’s some other good thing sure that’ll pay dividends later on as steps towards more harm reduction, but getting off Schedule I IS a big step, if not a complete step to righting the wrongs of the war on (some) drugs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

doesn’t this allow banking as well?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Agreed, Trump almost managed a coup, loaded the Supreme Court, and would fire random officials every other week… Then the democrats pretend the position of the president is powerless.

The establishment left are a joke.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Yeah, I’m really angry that the president didn’t “violate the law” to push through marijuana changes faster.

What were you hoping to see them do that they didn’t?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

That roommate analogy hit me right in the feels. Was just thinking yesterday if my roommate even decided to do the trash or any cleaning once soon, i wouldn’t even be happy bc it hasn’t been done in 3+ years and there’s much to make up for. But positive reinforcement and all right? It took long, but we should probably celebrate if it does happen to keep encouraging the process and stoke that flame. Firmly stating “good job so far, but the job’s not done yet.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 386K

    Comments