Legal pot in Colorado

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
17,547
Display Name
First Officer 6PC
Question: will the people in jail for pot possession be allowed to go free,
or sentences modified? Obviously it was a crime at the time but imagine being in jail for something and being on year one of your 10 year sentence and tomorrow it is no longer a crime.

Was reading the news this morning and got my wheels spinning.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Question: will the people in jail for pot possession be allowed to go free,
or sentences modified? Obviously it was a crime at the time but imagine being in jail for something and being on year one of your 10 year sentence and tomorrow it is no longer a crime.

Was reading the news this morning and got my wheels spinning.
Click to expand...
No one I know voted in favor of it.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Question: will the people in jail for pot possession be allowed to go free,
or sentences modified? Obviously it was a crime at the time but imagine being in jail for something and being on year one of your 10 year sentence and tomorrow it is no longer a crime.

Was reading the news this morning and got my wheels spinning.
Click to expand...


There are still people in federal prison for having seeds in their cars in the 60's. :mad2:
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Question: will the people in jail for pot possession be allowed to go free,
or sentences modified? Obviously it was a crime at the time but imagine being in jail for something and being on year one of your 10 year sentence and tomorrow it is no longer a crime.

Was reading the news this morning and got my wheels spinning.
Click to expand...

Tough question.

On the one hand, they did violate the law as it existed at the time.

On the other hand, it was a stupid law.

Personally, if I were the governor, I would commute the sentences of people whose only crimes were non-violent pot possession charges, and whose behavior records in prison were no worse than average. I don't think it's worth the social or fiscal costs to keep someone locked up for a non-violent offense that's not even an offense any more, just for the sake of making a point.

But that's just me. I could make a case for the other point of view, as well.

-Rich
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Question: will the people in jail for pot possession be allowed to go free,
or sentences modified? Obviously it was a crime at the time but imagine being in jail for something and being on year one of your 10 year sentence and tomorrow it is no longer a crime.

Was reading the news this morning and got my wheels spinning.
Click to expand...

You come up with the most interesting wheels
 
RJM62 said:
Tough question.

On the one hand, they did violate the law as it existed at the time.

On the other hand, it was a stupid law.

Personally, if I were the governor, I would commute the sentences of people whose only crimes were non-violent pot possession charges, and whose behavior records in prison were no worse than average. I don't think it's worth the social or fiscal costs to keep someone locked up for a non-violent offense that's not even an offense any more, just for the sake of making a point.

But that's just me. I could make a case for the other point of view, as well.

-Rich
Click to expand...
I might not be able to make quite as good a case for keeping them locked unless it was strictly an exercise in debating. Otherwise, you are spot on.
 
There is nowhere in the United States where Marijuana is, or will be in the immediate future, legal for any purpose.
 
JeffDG said:
There is nowhere in the United States where Marijuana is, or will be in the immediate future, legal for any purpose.
Click to expand...


Huh?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/28/us/10-things-colorado-recreational-marijuana/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

"Colorado will begin allowing recreational marijuana sales on January 1 to anyone age 21 or over. Residents will be able to buy marijuana like alcohol -- except the cannabis purchase is limited to an ounce, which is substantial enough to cost about $200 or more."
 
Jeff's comment probably relates to the fact that it remains prohibited under Federal law.

I admit when the whole debate started I wondered whether there would be an impact the FAA medical question that asks "...use of an illegal substance...".
 
Allergies preclude me from smoking much of anything but think it is fine to legalize it. I assume in a handful of years it will be legal everywhere.
 
May be legal in Colorado, but I bet you'll still have trouble getting that job in Colorado when the pee test shows cannabis usage.
 
tiger said:
Jeff's comment probably relates to the fact that it remains prohibited under Federal law.
Click to expand...


I still dont get how that works.
The state can say it is legal but the Gov't says no?
Does that mean there are still ways people will be getting arrested? just by different law enforcement?
 
TangoWhiskey said:
May be legal in Colorado, but I bet you'll still have trouble getting that job in Colorado when the pee test shows cannabis usage.
Click to expand...

yeah, there is a lot to think about.
I 'm sticking with craft brews.
 
I'm too stoned to know what's going on in this thread.



JK, I don't do that stuff and I'm not in Colorado.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
May be legal in Colorado, but I bet you'll still have trouble getting that job in Colorado when the pee test shows cannabis usage.
Click to expand...
Would just depend on your line of work really.
 
Cannabis and its derivatives remain listed as Schedule I drugs under the Controlled Substances Act federally.

You can be charged with a federal crime for any possession or use of cannabis anywhere in the United States, the District of Columbia, or any territory under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Article VI of the Constitution makes clear that in the event of a conflict of laws, the federal law is "the supreme law of the land" regardless of what the State says.

In Gonzalez v. Raich, the Supreme Court ruled that regardless of a California law giving licenses for medical use of marijuana, individuals could still be prosecuted under federal law, and that the Controlled Substances Act was, and remains, a valid exercise of federal power.
 
I don't think anyone convicted of alcohol production/possession in the 1920's as a result of the Volstead Act got any such relief after the Twenty-first Amendment repealed that Act, and I know of no precedent in which that occurred under any other change in the law.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't think anyone convicted of alcohol production/possession in the 1920's as a result of the Volstead Act got any such relief after the Twenty-first Amendment repealed that Act, and I know of no precedent in which that occurred under any other change in the law.
Click to expand...

Jefferson pardoned every single person convicted under the Alien and Sedition Acts as one of his first acts as President.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I still dont get how that works.
The state can say it is legal but the Gov't says no?
Does that mean there are still ways people will be getting arrested? just by different law enforcement?
Click to expand...
Not in the foreseeable future. Aug 29, 2013 statement from the DOJ makes it clear that this administration will not interfere with Colorado and Washington new laws relating to recreational pot.

But this begs the question - what happens if the next administration takes a different view?
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't think anyone convicted of alcohol production/possession in the 1920's as a result of the Volstead Act got any such relief after the Twenty-first Amendment repealed that Act, and I know of no precedent in which that occurred under any other change in the law.
Click to expand...

Was anyone ever convicted under Volstead? :rofl:
 
murphey said:
Not in the foreseeable future. Aug 29, 2013 statement from the DOJ makes it clear that this administration will not interfere with Colorado and Washington new laws relating to recreational pot.

But this begs the question - what happens if the next administration takes a different view?
Click to expand...

My guess is nothing. The pot smoking generation has now become the law makers. ;)
 
murphey said:
Not in the foreseeable future. Aug 29, 2013 statement from the DOJ makes it clear that this administration will not interfere with Colorado and Washington new laws relating to recreational pot.

But this begs the question - what happens if the next administration takes a different view?
Click to expand...

They didn't hold true to their word the last time they said it.

And what power grants an administration the ability to pick and chose what laws it wishes to enforce?
 
There is a bill in the house nu.499 to federally decriminalize marijauna and treat it like alcohol right now, although it probably won't dig it's way out of committee.
 
I thought people who smoked pot never got off the couch. I am surprised enough people voted for it to get it passed :)
 
To be fair, the feds did publicly announce that they would not prosecute anyone for possession of small amounts. They will, however, still be targeting traffickers in CO.
 
murphey said:
But this begs the question - what happens if the next administration takes a different view?
Click to expand...

They would be entirely free to, on day one, send the DEA into every single shop that is licensed for selling pot, and charge all of the owners with trafficking, and every patron they found with possession.
 
Gerhardt said:
To be fair, the feds did publicly announce that they would not prosecute anyone for possession of small amounts. They will, however, still be targeting traffickers in CO.
Click to expand...

The feds are not in any way bound by that announcement. January 20, 2017, the new POTUS can order immediate trafficking charges against every shop in CO (including any that decided to close the day before, because the law was on the books on the 19th too...just wasn't being enforced, it can be enforced anytime until the statute of limitations expires).
 
tiger said:
Jeff's comment probably relates to the fact that it remains prohibited under Federal law.

I admit when the whole debate started I wondered whether there would be an impact the FAA medical question that asks "...use of an illegal substance...".
Click to expand...

You would answer "Yes", as cannabis is still an illegal substance under federal law, and if you answer "No", you'd be lying on your medical.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I still dont get how that works.
The state can say it is legal but the Gov't says no?
Does that mean there are still ways people will be getting arrested? just by different law enforcement?
Click to expand...

There are many instances where local, state and/or federal law conflict. The more restrictive law always trumps.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Huh?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/28/us/10-things-colorado-recreational-marijuana/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

"Colorado will begin allowing recreational marijuana sales on January 1 to anyone age 21 or over. Residents will be able to buy marijuana like alcohol -- except the cannabis purchase is limited to an ounce, which is substantial enough to cost about $200 or more."
Click to expand...
Still federally illegal and the feds can stuff any of the state legal potties in the federal pokey if they want. Keep your laws off my body man.:goofy:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top