Lord love a duck:
Forget the science that says otherwise: Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III has spoken:
Sessions likes putting lots of people in jail, especially if they're not white. Makes him look really butch. He thinks. I guess Kelly got the word: pot is an existential threat.
You think someone's stuck in the 1950s?
(I wonder where all those states' rights advocates are hiding on this.)
Two days after downplaying the role of marijuana in the nation's drug war, Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly changed course Tuesday, calling it a "potentially dangerous gateway drug" and saying his agency would continue to arrest and investigate those who traded in it in violation of federal law.
"Let me be clear about marijuana: It is a potentially dangerous gateway drug that frequently leads to the use of harder drugs," he said in his first major speech since being sworn in. "Its use and possession is against federal law and until that law is changed by the United States Congress, we at DHS, along with the rest of the federal government, are sworn to uphold all the laws that are on the books."
Forget the science that says otherwise: Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III has spoken:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has decried pot use and has advocated a crackdown. In a speech last month, Sessions said marijuana was only "slightly less awful" than heroin, and he declared at a Senate hearing last year that "good people don't smoke marijuana."
Kelly's remarks Tuesday seemed to be an effort to bring his position on marijuana more in keeping with Sessions', two days after he took a decidedly softer line. On Sunday, Kelly had said marijuana was "not a factor" in the war on drugs, and that the search for solutions to the drug problem in the U.S. should focus on addictive drugs and not "arresting a lot of users."
Sessions likes putting lots of people in jail, especially if they're not white. Makes him look really butch. He thinks. I guess Kelly got the word: pot is an existential threat.
You think someone's stuck in the 1950s?
(I wonder where all those states' rights advocates are hiding on this.)
No comments:
Post a Comment