Biden pardons marijuana use nationwide
usatoday.com
usatoday.com
I don't use that particular drug, have never used it and have no desire to use it but I'm fine with it being legal as long as there are some restrictions on where people can use it in public. I don't want to have to smell that unpleasant plant on the streets or public transit or other public places. There are appropriate and inappropriate places to smoke tobacco and something similar should be done for marijuana. Also, minors should not be allowed to use it just as they aren't allowed to use tobacco or alcohol.
Normally I would agree, though this has been a process, not just this quick vote grab.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/10/06/bide...
Edit to add: The timing of the process is probably for the benefit of votes and the like.
I'm fairly certain that basically all places that have decriminalized/legalized marijuana have such regulations in place.
If someone can be high in public without repercussion, bdw5204's desire not to smell it in public will unfortunately go unsatisfied.
I'd like that. Second-hand marijuana gives me a headache, often before I even consciously notice the smell (so I can't hold my breath or walk away).
That said, having non-smoking areas means we need to have dedicated smoking areas, otherwise it's just an indirect ban on smokers. Habit-forming drugs are hard to kick, so – at least until we have a readily-available way for people to take them without polluting the atmosphere – we need common, dedicated areas where people can take them, accessible within a few minutes' walk of most public spaces and workplaces.
What happens if you are exposed to higher concentrations, is it a medical emergency of some kind? And what specifically happens? I'd love to learn more.
When I'm exposed to higher concentrations, either I get a stronger headache, or the headache goes away and I get light-headed. I haven't died yet, so I don't think it's a medical emergency of any kind.
I don't even know if it's because of the marijuana. Perhaps the breeze is concentrating a load of (e.g.) carbon monoxide in certain places, and it just happens to also concentrate marijuana scent… but I think it's probably the marijuana. https://www.durham.ac.uk/research/current/research-news/thre... has some possible explanations:
> The chemicals that activate the smell signals in our brain (called odorants) can sometimes irritate our sinuses. Smoke, perfume and chlorine are some of the most common odorants that cause irritation.
> When [the trigeminal] pathway is stimulated it causes inflammation because it detects a threat that only the immune system can sort out. This, too, can lead to a headache. Chemical smells such as formaldehyde, certain cleaning products and cigarette smoke are all known to act directly on the trigeminal pathway.
Some cannabinoids are known to act on the trigeminal pathway, and I don't usually get headaches from smoke, so it might be that… but I haven't run any experiments, so who knows?
Could also be hypochondria. Hypochondria isn't a personal choice and there is no blame in that suggestion.
When I'm not using those spaces and smoke on the street, I get stopped and frisked (never happens to me in NYC tho as someone who is melanated).
The logic is preventing you from being arrested tomorrow for your use last month. If he only pardoned those who were already arrested and/or convicted there would be nothing stopping the prosecution of people who just hadn't yet been arrested.
And on other social media you can see how juvenile people are when they say "why don't you just legalize it".
Note: This only applies to certain Federal crimes, and in the District of Columbia. Not the states.
Lovingly requires you to register to receive your certificate. Yeah, no thanks.
Why does this sound like a school essay written to pad word count.
Sort of a second-order implication, then. In any case, I hope the consequences will be consequential for all those involved.
Politicians doing things to get re-elected is generally how democracy works.
I fear the unintended side effects. Like, somebody put away on such a charge because it was easier than the more important charge. Now gonna have to be retried. For example.
I'm aware of cases like this that happened a long time ago. Domestic abusers who got put away on drug charges because it was easier than the alternatives. I still think this pardon is an overall good thing.
If somebody guilty of a bigger crime is actually released because of this, the AG's prosecutor bears the guilt: it's still the just thing to do.
As a counterpoint this may make the justice system pursue larger charges going forward.
If a street level dealer was caught, and they offered a plea deal of possession to save time, trial, legal expenses, etc that person will now be pardoned.
If the DoJ doesn't like this outcome it could lead to them going after everyone for full charges and basically end plea deals.
If the prosecution has the goods, make them prove it. Otherwise they shouldn't be able to use empty threats to brow beat someone into a guilty plea.
Any such person should unquestionably be released.
I suggest there will be unintended consequences.
Out of all the potential consequences, you're focused on this one. I'm just trying to understand your intent. Are you suggesting alternatives?
If the charge was important and also provable, it should have been charged. And in many cases, the statute of limitation would prevent charging the conduct now, anyway.
Probably not; federally, simple possession of marijuana carries a maximum 1 year sentence and had 145 convictions in 2021, with zero prisoners as of January 2022 in federal custody solely on simple possession of marijuana charges.
The impact of this is almost entirely on clearing past records, not releasing current offenders.
https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/weighing-impa...