Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 119

Thread: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

  1. #11
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Subjective is determining that rigorous application of the law's penalties will result will invariably results in its aim. Then again, everything is subjective, and the objective is only the degree of realism within the subjective agent's perspective.
    And thus, it boils down to "I am not enforcing the law because I dont like it".

    Anyway, an executive power's ability to enforce the law is contingent on its power to do so.
    Having a limited ability does not prevent an executive from enforcing the law to its full ability, or excuse him for deciding to not do so. In this case, the argument is not 'limited ability' but a simple choice to not enforce the law.

  2. #12
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    And thus, it boils down to "I am not enforcing the law because I dont like it".
    I don't see how such an "and thus" can be derived from what I said.

    Having a limited ability does not prevent an executive from enforcing the law to its full ability, or excuse him for deciding to not do so. In this case, the argument is not 'limited ability' but a simple choice to not enforce the law.
    Unless otherwise specified or negotiated, the executive power reserves the right to execute the laws in its own style, without incurring any penalties.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  3. #13
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,516

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    The executive branch exists to enforce all of the law, not arbitrarily decide which law to enforce.

    Personally, legalized medical marijuana is perfectly fine with me. But the law is what it is, and until it's changed, it's not a combo menu.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #14
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Welcome to being wrong. That's not how executive power works. And I mean that institutionally and legally, not just practically.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 10-19-09 at 02:05 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  5. #15
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    I don't see how such an "and thus" can be derived from what I said.

    The standard you suggest is subjective, and then you admit that everything is subjective.


    Unless otherwise specified or negotiated, the executive power reserves the right to execute the laws in its own style.
    Which is also NOT the issue here -- unless you want to argue that 'ignoring offenders who are doing something I think should not be illegal' is an 'enforcement style'.

    The President doesnt decide what should or should or should not be illegal -- congress does that, passes a law to that effect, and then the President enforces it.

    Oath of office:
    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
    A President selectively enforcing laws based on what he believes should/should not be legal is NOT faithfully executing the office of the President.

  6. #16
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Welcome to being wrong. That's not how executive power works. And I mean that institutionally and legally, not just practically.
    Glad you were there to open the door... but he (and I) are obviously in the wrong place...

  7. #17
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    The standard you suggest is subjective, and then you admit that everything is subjective.
    Out of strict psychological necessity. No one can get outside their own head -- that's where our little Cartesian theater occurs, so to speak. There is no experience you can have that won't be processed totally subjectively. It is only when people begin scrutinizing their experiences more closely that they become 'objective' -- but only as a degree within their 100% subjectivity. But this abstruse philosophical detour it is not of immense importance.

    Quote:
    Unless otherwise specified or negotiated, the executive power reserves the right to execute the laws in its own style.
    Which is also NOT the issue here -- unless you want to argue that 'ignoring offenders who are doing something I think should not be illegal' is an 'enforcement style'.

    The President doesnt decide what should or should or should not be illegal -- congress does that, passes a law to that effect, and then the President enforces it.

    Oath of office:
    That would depend on how the law is written and the rigor of the opposition. The President hasn't interpreted the law incorrectly in his implementations until the Supreme Court says he has gone astray, and never before.

    A President selectively enforcing laws based on what he believes should/should not be legal is NOT faithfully executing the office of the President.
    That's not what this is about. This is about proper management of resources in order to execute a law to the most effective degree possible, and nothing else until proven in a court of law. Executive authority has all the right to manage legislative aims in its own style, partially because that is the only effective way to handle anything. If he was always deferring to the cues of the Congress, then he would never accomplish anything, because the Congress would misapprehend the magnitude of his means.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 10-19-09 at 02:18 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  8. #18
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Out of strict psychological necessity.
    And thus, a subjective standard.

    No one can get outside their own head -- that's where our little Cartesian theater occurs, so to speak. There is no experience you can have that won't be processed totally subjectively. It is only when people begin scrutinizing their experiences more closely that they become 'objective' -- but only as a degree within their 100% subjectivity.
    Doesnt matter how many agree with it -- it is still a subjective standard.

    That would depend on how the law is written and the rigor of the opposition. The President hasn't interpreted the law incorrectly in his implementations until the Supreme Court says he has gone astray, and never before
    Oh, I SEE...
    So, until the court tells him to stop, its OK for the President to do what he wants.


    That's not what this is about. This is about proper management of resources in order to execute a law to the most effective degree possible, and nothing else until proven in a court of law
    Oh, I SEE...
    So, until a court tells him to stop, its OK for the President to do enforce whatever parts of a law he wants, and irngore whatever part he wants, based on some subjective standard.


    And lets be clear:
    "It will not be a priority to use federal resources to prosecute patients with serious illnesses or their caregivers who are complying with state laws on medical marijuana
    The basis for non-enforcement is The Obama's position on if the act should or should not be illegal, as it is tied to state laws that run counter to the federal law.

    Executive authority has all the right to manage legislative aims in its own style, partially because that is the only effective way to handle anything.
    If that were true, then there would be only one way of effectively handling anything.

    If he was always deferring to the cues of the Congress...
    HE doesnt defer anything -- the Constitution sets the standard here.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 10-19-09 at 02:32 PM.

  9. #19
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,516

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Welcome to being wrong. That's not how executive power works. And I mean that institutionally and legally, not just practically.
    Preposterous.

    If you're talking about, say, prosecutorial discretion, that's an entirely different thing.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #20
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    re: Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy [edited]

    And thus, a subjective standard.
    Not a standard.

    Doesnt matter how many agree with it -- it is still a subjective standard.
    No, it is the only logically possible means of processing phenomena for human beings. It is not a standard for anything. "Everything is subjective," is not a standard, because nothing can be measured against an absolute. It is a necessary condition of existence.

    Oh, I SEE...
    So, until the court tells him to stop, its OK for the President to do what he wants.
    That's one way of phrasing it, but it misrepresents the reality of the situation. The President probably won't be able to do anything if there isn't some stability in his policies and consistency between his endeavors and the aims of Congress, partially because the Congress won't pass laws on his agenda without cooperation, and also because the Supreme Court will always be on his case. This is all part of the mathematics of the checks and balances system of government. The president must always gravitate in certain parameters, no matter how liberal or conservative he is.

    Oh, I SEE...
    So, until a court tells him to stop, its OK for the President to do enforce whatever parts of a lwa he wants, and irngore whatever part he wants, based on some subjective standard.
    Based on the law's purpose. All laws must enumerate their purpose in some part of the literature of their drafting. The president can't deviate from that. Obama can't just stop all prosecutions of anything marijuana related effective immediately, but he can apportion resources [time, money, and manpower] according to what merits the most attention. Usually bills also include specifications on how he should go about this, or such specifications already exist for bills of this type within prior judicial rulings, and he will have to incorporate that into his understanding before making a move. Since Obama is a lawyer and has lawyers for advisers, I'm sure he has thought things through before going through with the policy change so that he won't receive much trouble.

    If that were true, then there would be only one way of effectively handling anything.
    One of a broad category. The most optimal policy is rarely implemented because people don't know it or can't agree to it. However, you can get more or less close to it.

    If he was always deferring to the cues of the Congress...
    HE doesnt defer anything -- the Constitution sets the standard here.
    Only in the most abstract sense. Constitutional standards have to be qualified, and have their qualifications revised, in federal branches of government. Rights like privacy, for example, have been qualified and revised multiple times in the Supreme Court.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 10-19-09 at 02:42 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •