Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Routes Available | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

To enforce or not to enforce?

September 13, 2013

We continue to be amazed at the Obama administration’s stance that it will allow Colorado and Washington to thumb their noses at federal law by permitting recreational use of marijuana....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(11)

Russ98387

Sep-13-13 2:45 AM

The only consistency of the oblamer regime is confusion. The rule for the regime is that if the law promotes the traditional fabric of American society it is not to be enforced. The regime seeks to dismantle all traditional American values while creating a class of government dependents whether they are illegal immigrants or drug dependent US citizens. When the law was passed, 21 was the legal age just like alcohol yet at any rallys, high school students openly use and nothing is done. Welcome to the brave new world of progressive utopia where you if you illegally cross the border you will be able to get instant citizenship and qualify for taxpayer aid or you can stay stoned,claim disability and get benefits.

7 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LOLMinot

Sep-13-13 10:38 AM

That's because you're a group of small-time, closed-minded individuals, MDN.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rajiihammr

Sep-13-13 10:23 PM

Holy cow Russ... there might be an opening at the "Onion" for you if you can channel that thinking so that it resembled reality just a little bit.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-15-13 3:40 AM

MDN - Peat and Repeat?

Federal law has tried to be enforced many times, and they Lost every time! If the defender pleads not guilty than it has to go to a jury trial in that state and no jury will convict when they follow the laws of their state. That left the only option for the Feds was to confiscate buildings and threaten banks. Which they did successfully. If they did not care then they would not have done that, but they did.

Anyone who claims to be Republican generally believes in States rights. Or is it only when it is Convenient? Unbelievable transparent, or should I say Shallow!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-15-13 3:48 AM

They could have sued in Federal Court on the constitutionality of the law, and I wish they would have, so we can get real clarification on States Rights once and for all. However they could only sue based on the interstate commerce act, and they probably would have lost because there really is no interstate commerce of the MJ. though it is said to be a multibillion dollar business..

States rights are something that most republicans and most democrats I know support. There is a place for federal laws, but states right's should prevail whenever it has to with what's going on in that state only and does not affect the nation.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-15-13 9:49 AM

You know nothing about your rights being trampled on. Anyone outside of the USA knows that, but you don't. Why do you think everyone in the world wants to be here! You do not see many folks sayin " I want to live in Russia or China or North Korea where they really do have a Regime".

Do you believe in States rights or Not? The folk in these states voted on it. What kind of Republican are you.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-16-13 12:33 AM

So Through a bunch of writing, you are saying, Yes you agree with me afterall that if the States want it is ok, and you disagree with this article.

What a State Oky is. Wow, its hard to believe you left there to come to ND to work. Why did you not stay in that great state?? They need people like you. Coming here to dumb down when you could have stayed there dumbed up!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-16-13 11:46 AM

I could care less about your party affiliation, but talking through two sides of your mouth is what I am calling you on.

You either agree with states rights or you don't and you played both sides of the coin at your convenience on this blog rather than your real beliefs. Simply put you argue to argue the side you chose by party affiliation rather than admit you are agreeing with someone that you may think Liberal, or whatever that is.

"Recently we passed a law" I guess I thought "we" meant you were a part of the state of Oklahoma and working here. I guess you still are than so I wonder why you are arguing on a local newspaper in ND as though you are from here. You and I agree it appears on your states rights though and you cannot accept it because of your preconceived notions about one half the population. Even Dustoff3 understands that you should not be all one way or the other, because life just does not work that way... Get off the rhetoric and speak your

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Worldview

Sep-16-13 12:12 PM

Thanks

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Sep-16-13 10:13 PM

No, thank YOU, Whistler and Worldview.

How refreshing...

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JackAaah

Sep-18-13 9:01 AM

I, too, favor states rights.....but I thank god that we have the Circuit Courts and the Supreme Court to limit those rights, and to enhance federal rights....to move forword....

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 11 of 11 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web