Legalization group to hand out 4,200 free joints at Trump inauguration

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

A D.C.-based weed legalization group has announced that they will be handing out 4,200 free joints at Donald Trump’s inauguration to celebrate relaxed marijuana laws in the district and to help those partaking deal with the reality of Trump as president, WUSA is reporting.

The DC Cannabis Coalition is using the historic occasion to call attention to the passage of Initiative 71 which made it legal to possess two ounces or less of marijuana, to grow it, and to give it away.

What is doesn’t allow is the sale of weed.

According to the group, they will start handing out joints at 8:00 a.m. on January 20th on the west side of Dupont Circle, before leading a protest march to the National Mall.

“The main message is it’s time to legalize cannabis at the federal level. We don’t want any money exchanged whatsoever, this is really a gift for people who come to Washington, D.C.,” said Adam Eidinger, the founder of DCMJ which was behind Initiative 71.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/free-weed-legalization-group-to-hand-out-4200-free-joints-at-trump-inauguration/

[Calculating]

1. Seems like they're asking for trouble honestly

Why give Trump a reason to dislike cannabis, or think the users are his political enemies.

[jmowreader]

5. He already thinks that way

What's the difference?

[Warren DeMontague]

7. I actually don't think he gives a crap about weed.

I'm sure the hardcore lawn order GOPpers want some sort of crackdown, but even beyond the political tenability- which isn't there, given the polls and the reality, not to mention Trump's own statements on the campaign trail- it's questionable how doable such a thing would be.

Sure, AG Sessions could "enforce Federal Law"- but what would that look like, when 28 states have some form of legalization, even if it is only medical- that is in conflict with Federal law just as recreational is. And it's worth noting that the Cole Memo didn't spring entirely from Obama's supposedly "permissive" weed approach; in reality, James Cole and others in the DOJ looked at the situation in Colorado and Washington and saw that their options were pretty fuckin' limited.

As a Washington State ACLU lawyer recently noted, if the Feds push too hard against the will of the people in states that have legalized, there is nothing to prevent those states from eliminating all mention of cannabis from their state statues, entirely. The Feds can't FORCE states to outlaw pot. So with zero help or even any sort of regulatory apparatus from state governments, there would be a pot free-for-all, as opposed to a regulated, taxed, and controlled legal situation. And the Feds simply do. not. have. the resources to go in and stamp out all the weed themselves.

Now, I don't know what Sessions is going to do- full caveat- but I do think it's quite possible they may decide they have more important things to do than try and do battle against the will of the voters in states that have relaxed their marijuana laws.

[awoke_in_2003]

9. Yet Sessions

his pick for Justice, thinks it is the most evil thing ever.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Yeah, I addressed that in my post, there.

I dont know what Sessions is going to do, or try to do... but as I laid out, his options may be kind of limited. We'll see.

[awoke_in_2003]

19. I see them using federal authority

to start going after the dispensaries and their money. Throw the people in federal prison. Crush a few, and the rest will get scared.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. It is a possibility.

Last edited Wed Jan 4, 2017, 08:01 PM - Edit history (1)

But the industry is big and pretty far along. There will be pushback. Cannabis is, like, a 20 billion with a b dollar business in California, something like that. And like i said, you have 28 states now with medical laws. They're in conflict with the feds, too.

And this possibility I outlined from the WA state ACLU shouldnt be dismissed easily, either. If Trump/Sessions picks this particular fight, he risks alienating swing state voters in CO, NV and AK for starts, but also it makes pot prohibition a "Republican/Trump" brand. In such circumstances that makes a full removal of cannabis from state law entirely a much easier sell to angry blue staters in places like California.

And after that, they have ZERO assistance on matters pot from state police/authorities. No regulatory structures. None. Pot becomes an unregulated free for all. They dont have the resources to control that from the federal level, not even close.

[NightWatcher]

2. I've got cargo pants and a nice backpack. I can hold a few hundred.

See y'all there.

[Rollo]

3. "When they go low, we (not you, they, or I) get high"...

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 12:26 AM - Edit history (1)

Great way to lose an election.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. I guess you weren't paying attention to the results on election night, then.

Pot did consistently better across the board than any of the candidates.

[awoke_in_2003]

10. Most of the candidates

make people want to spark up.

[Rollo]

12. Great. Donald Trump is then the president that pot elected?

[Warren DeMontague]

13. what kind of logic is that? Do we want to support UNpopular policies?

Last edited Wed Jan 4, 2017, 05:55 AM - Edit history (1)

The polls don't lie, Jack. I realize that East Coast/Beltway conventional wisdom types are perpetually slow on the uptake on shit like this and as such a good 5 years or more behind where the pulse of the actual electorate is, but the trend is clear.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/196550/support-legal-marijuana.aspx



And prohibition is a failed, indefensible policy, as well.

So I'm not sure what your point is. We can either go where the voters are, or not. Go ahead and keep assuming it's a giant joke. Voters in unpopulated, remote podunk places like California, and their hayseed pols like Gavin Newsom, know better.

[Rollo]

16. It's no more illogical...

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 12:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Than equating the popularity of pot legalization with the inauguration.

But the problem here is endemic to the pot smoking crowd. I would imagine a fair portion of them only cared about legalizing their drug of choice, and either abstained from voting for the Democratic slate, or voted for a 3rd party candidate, or even worse, voted for Trump.

Nor does the idea of a mass pot-in at the inauguration make much sense. It will only bait the reactionary Trump proto cabinet, and perhaps even encourage Trump to rescind Obama's executive order to lay off states with legal pot laws, and instead enforce federal laws against it.

Remember, if one wanted a federal administration that was at least not inclined to force the issue, then one should have put down the joint for a few minutes and voted for Hillary. Instead we got an anti-drug psycho in the White House.

Good times.

Hey, and what does a pot head say to a free joint at Trump's inauguration?

"You're fired!"...

[Warren DeMontague]

18. Who precisely the fuck is it you think you're talking to, here?

"you imagine". Why don't you compare these two maps. Where do you imagine the electoral votes of California went? Washington? Oregon? Nevada? Colorado?





You really want to blame "potheads" for ignoring the Democratic Party, and not vice-versa?

You also have a fuckton of nerve coming in here and assuming who I as a 13 year member of this community did or didn't vote for.

"you should have put down the joint hurrrr durrrrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Oh yeah, and



The all too predictable stoner shot, of course.

and yet, you're the one who can't even assemble a consistent logical argument, here. What's up with that?

Try reading the thread. I don't know what AG sessions will do, but it's a tad more complex than "rescind Obama's executive order". James Cole wasn't acting in a vacuum. There are real problems if the Feds decide to go against the will of the states, which remember, now come to 28 that have some form of legalization, recreational or medical, in conflict with Federal Law. I know that East Coasters are sometimes only dimly aware of it, but there are 34 million people in California. 50 million on the West Coast proper. The Feds simply don't have the resources to shut down all the pot production. Not gonna happen. One of the reasons Cole wrote his memo was the fear that legal states would react by removing cannabis entirely from their law books- the feds can't FORCE a state to make it illegal, see. In which case weed would be wide open and unregulated. There aren't nearly enough DEA and FBI agents to manage that kind of situation in Los Angeles County alone, and that's if they stopped paying attention to anything else.

We'll see.

But one thing is for sure, the interesting stuff, politically, technologically, and culturally in this country, is happening on the West Coast. Try venturing west of the Appalachians sometime, you might be amazed.

[Rollo]

21. A bunch of stoners?

I work with a few.

I know the type.

However I don't know who you are nor do I particularly care.

Who you voted for? I never assumed anything about that. It's not all about you.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. Yeah, well, your condescending attitude is perfectly examplary of the problem with the people

Last edited Thu Jan 5, 2017, 03:54 AM - Edit history (3)

Who think they're set up to determine the ideological tone and priorities of our party.

I cant count the number of times I've read some too-clever-by-half think (using the word loosely) piece on this topic by a beltway conventional wisdom Pundit supposedly on "our" side, dripping with snarky crap about "Duuuuude" and "buzzkill" and how clever can we be making bong puns.

Derp.

Meanwhile, even George fucking Will understands the personal freedom and constitutional implications of things like pot legalization and the drug war. When you're coming off as more of an asshole than George Will, it's a good bet you're doing "progressivism" wrong.

The good news is, those people and their out of touch, low valence attitudes are relics and dinosaurs and on their way out. Real grown-up leadership from people like Newsom, Merkley, and Blumenauer, who understand that this issue isn't a giant stoner joke, is coming to our party.

Also, pro tip: saying, as you did in your post to me, "you should have put down the joint long enough to vote for Hillary Clinton" is a violation of the rules of this site, "rollo".

[Rollo]

37. Perhaps you missed this line in the post you replied to?

"Who you voted for? I never assumed anything about that. It's not all about you."

Clearly I was using the word "you" in the general sense, as one might use the word "one". Not directed at any particular member here. I'm sorry you didn't understand that.

And if anyone has been violating the rules, look in the mirror.

[Warren DeMontague]

40. it's my fault you didn't phrase your post better?

[Rollo]

41. I'm sorry you didn't understand what I wrote...

I will have to remember to be more clear in future.

Because some people (nobody in particular) tend to get paranoid, defensive, and jump to negative conclusions at the drop of a pin.

Then they go into Trump emulation mode and accuse the people they attack of using the same tactics.

Again, present company excepted.

Claro que sí?

[Warren DeMontague]

44. Next time, try "they" instead of "you"

I would have been perfectly happy to keep this thread on the level of the serious political issue that cannabis legalization is. For instance, my state has already pulled in several times the expected tax revenue from the first year of (limited, even) recreational sales. That is money going to roads, infrastructure, public services.

Out West people understand that it's legitimate, real, and being advanced by serious people. I dont understand why the further east you go, the more people seem to treat it like it's a joke that has to do with their bong-pulling college roommate with the bob marley poster from 3 decades ago.

Now, is having a smoke-in in DC during the inauguration the best way to advance the issue? I dont know, but I also dont think the public is anything as knee-jerk anti as you seem to think it is. The whole damn town is gonna be a circus. There will also be pro choice protesters dressed like vaginas. Does that mean roe v. Wade isnt a serious issue?

Lastly, you said you voted for legalization. Great. Which state?

[Rollo]

45. "one", "they", and "you" are all interchangeable in a calm reasoned discussion. My bad.

I would have been perfectly happy to keep this thread on the level of the serious political issue that cannabis legalization is. For instance, my state has already pulled in several times the expected tax revenue from the first year of (limited, even) recreational sales. That is money going to roads, infrastructure, public services.

That's the problem. The original topic is about how the DC Cannabis Legalization group is staging a free joint smoke-in in DC as close as they can get to the inauguration at the same time as the inauguration. It's a cloudy message at best. Are they saying that smoking pot like that is a political statement that somehow is related to Trump's election? If not, why hold it in that place and at that time? Why not hold it on the day the measure passed, or takes effect? As it is, I can hear those right of center smirking at the idea, and tarring the entire Democratic Party as a bunch of pot heads who can't get their act together. You don't think it will have negative repercussions? Let's wait and see.

Out West people understand that it's legitimate, real, and being advanced by serious people. I dont understand why the further east you go, the more people seem to treat it like it's a joke that has to do with their bong-pulling college roommate with the bob marley poster from 3 decades ago.

I haven't noticed a regional difference, but then you and I probably travel in different circles. Let me put it this way: I am no stranger to the pros and cons of marijuana. At one time I really enjoyed it. But for me for many years now, the cons have out-weighed the pros. But I don't think it should be illegal they way it is today esp on the federal level. But having seen it up close, and having been around regular users both at work and socially, it definitely has an effect on how people behave and inter-relate. There have been convincing scientific studies on the loss of empathy, paranoia, memory problems, and other negative side effects. My own observations of current users bear this out. As do certain posts here. But adults should be able to make their own decisions about it. I do think it should be regulated much like alcohol or tobacco, and I am sympathetic to employers who ban it in the workplace. Legalization doesn't mean it's harmless, after all.

Now, is having a smoke-in in DC during the inauguration the best way to advance the issue? I dont know, but I also dont think the public is anything as knee-jerk anti as you seem to think it is. The whole damn town is gonna be a circus. There will also be pro choice protesters dressed like vaginas. Does that mean roe v. Wade isnt a serious issue?

I would not advise anyone to dress as a vagina around Donald Trump on his inauguration day. Or on any day for that matter. But then it's probably a good idea to avoid him as much as humanly possible regardless of costuming choices.

Lastly, you said you voted for legalization. Great. Which state?

Yes I did vote for it.

What state did I vote in? The state of undisclosed location.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. Two of the biggest defenders of legalization issues in Congress are Dana Rorbacher and Rand Paul.

The "center right" isnt where you think it is. Thats my point. The parameters of the debate are no longer some sort of simplistic right/left "Democrats are the potheads". George Will has written against the drug war. Poll after poll shows the American people trending towards small-l libertarian views on goverment not micro-managing the lives and choices of consenting adults, and where our party has failed is in being too timid to define ourselves unapologetically as the home of personal freedom and individual agency and liberty. (And it is worth noting that, in states where our party has done that, we have won consistently even in off years)

We've been asleep at the wheel, and ceded a lot of votes which should be ours.

Marijuana was on the ballot last november in, what, 8 states, and won in 7? I'm not sure the so-called center right people are too busy smirking, to read the polls.

And DC legalization passed 2 years ago, for the record.

I dont know where you are, but I would strongly urge you to visit a state where legalization is up and running to acquaint yourself with how well it works and how widely popular it is.

[Rollo]

47. Doesn't matter...

What state I live in. In my community the laws against pot are rarely if ever enforced, so I have been able to see it in use up close and personal for a very long time.

Libertarians are an interesting bunch. They are left of center in terms of personal freedom, right of center when it comes to social programs to help those in need. It doesn't surprise me that Rand Paul supports legalization. But he's probably in favor of destroying Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the ACA as well. Kind of a schizoid approach.

I can tell you one thing about legalization: I have a friend from India. We'd hang out with pot smokers quite a bit, but he didn't smoke. He did like to drink, though. When I asked him why, he shrugged, and said, "In India pot is the drug of the lowest classes. Alcohol is outlawed in most places, so of course it's more desired and sought after."

So, beware of the unintended consequences of legalization. It may, in time, result in less, not more, use of it. I've long maintained the best way to fight drug use by youth is to legalize all of them, and make them available only through the local Post Office. The experience of having to wait in line at the PO to get one's supply is sure to turn off legions of youngsters. Maybe a lot of adults, too.

To me, pot is a very secondary issue compared to the horrible stuff that's about to happen in DC for the next two years at least. And perhaps this is why I find the inauguration pot-in to be so ludicrous. It's the recreational drug equivalent of invading Iraq to get back at al Quaeda.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. You seem to believe I have some vested interest in, say, people smoking more pot.

Which is kind of silly and not where I'm coming from at all. I actually think when people smoke it all the time, it loses a lot of the benefits it might otherwise impart to them in terms of creativity enhancement and increased awareness. I smoked it all the time as a youth, but one advantage it had over other substances that might be prone to abuse (like alcohol) is that stopping after even a long period of regular use was a relative piece of cake.

Now, in my advanced years, I maybe take a hit off a joint once in a blue moon. Say Ratdog goes back on tour, that kind of thing. But I'm as committed to legalization as ever, particularly now that I've seen it work.

I absolutely believe that legalization results in, for instance, reduced underage use. Statistics are bearing this out, too. Because for one thing, it loses the allure of the "forbidden", it becomes uncool like Classic Rock and Mom Jeans- something middle aged people do or granny uses to help with her glaucoma while she's watching QVC. And when it is passing through a regulated market, people get carded for it.

I grew up in a state where it was still considered a criminal offense (if not enforced all that often assuming one was white, another argument against the drug war) and believe me, we still smoked a shit-ton of pot. And it was easier to obtain than alcohol, by far. Don't confuse being around people who smoke pot, or somewhere where the laws aren't strictly enforced (there are tens of millions of pot smokers in this country. I trekked around after the Grateful Dead during the 80s and 90s and visited maybe half the states. Shit, I saw the Dead in Salt Lake City, of all places. Trust me, there isn't anywhere in this nation where people don't smoke pot) with being somewhere where it's legal.

That is still not the same as being able to walk into a clean, well-lit government regulated establishment and purchase a clearly labeled product with measured THC and CBD content, for instance, that has been subject to pesticide regulations and the like. Not the same as having the tax revenue helping balance your state budget.

As for the Libertarians, yes. They make sense about half the time, and then they get all fucking Ayn Rand. But we as Democrats and progressives are foolish if we cede the considerable personal freedom votes to those people, particularly because a lot of the freedom-minded voters don't want, for instance, to privatize fire departments and get rid of the FDA.

[moriah]

32. If you weren't talking about Warren or other DUers..

Remember, if you wanted a federal administration that was at least not inclined to force the issue, then you should have put down the joint for a few minutes and voted for Hillary. Instead you got an anti-drug psycho in the White House.

You could have replaced "you" with "they".

Because, I must admit, even to me it sounded like you were blaming DUers for tRump's election.

[Rollo]

33. I was talking about...

The fools who think smoking pot is a political statement.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. well gee, whiz.

it sure sounds like the "dumb stoners" have a better grasp of sentence construction and logic than you do. Weird, braah.

[Rollo]

42. Sorry if my writing style is too informal for somebody's refined taste...

Not my problem.

[panader0]

20. Is that you Jeff?

[Rollo]

22. Dave's not here

[moriah]

29. No, man, I'm Dave, man.

[Rollo]

30. Dave's not here.

[moriah]

28. Are you honestly suggesting DUers *didn't* vote?

I do know people who were misled into voting third party because they thought legalization was more likely if they won. They didn't. They were duped. I do get that part of your rant.

They were not DUers, however.

Additionally, rehashing the 2016 election has its own forum.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. here, I'll translate.

"hurr, durr, durr durr. dum stoners pot hurrr durrr durrr hyuk hyuk go smoke a jointhurrr durrr put down the bongdurrr, hurrr hurrrr.

And furthermore, durrr durrr hurr and durr durr. When the binomial coefficient of hurr is calclulated for the solution of durr, variable derp is found to occupy a range from hurrrrr, to durr."

[Warren DeMontague]

39. So hit the alert button, then.

You're all over this thread dumping out tired tropes and condescending insults, and you want to complain because you've been called on it. Fine. Knock yourself out.

What's really surprising you, I suspect, is that the 20 or more year old outdated conventional wisdom script you're playing about "stoners" doesn't fucking fly anymore.

While you throw out tired jokes, the fact remains that it's a serious issue. The next Governor of California has made it a signature part of his agenda. Time to get with the program.

[Rollo]

36. Au contraire...

The ones "rehashing" the election are the hash heads who want to light up en masse at the inauguration, as if the act of getting stoned in public is somehow a profound political statement about the election.

It isn't.

It's just another hedonistic pastime.

As for them being DUers, I don't know. I imagine there are some members here who would like to attend the smoke-in, and some who will. Their business. Free country and all that. I just don't buy that it's anything more than a lame attempt to pass off self-gratification as something more.

As for legalization, yes, I voted for it. Why not? But it's like tobacco and alcohol. There's a time and place for it. I don't see a mass effort to get drunk* at the inauguration. Do you?

[moriah]

49. I got drunk for the debates to deal with Trump's face and what was coming out of it.

And the closest I'm getting to the inauguration is watching something else on TV. But if I were forced to watch, I might need a nice hooter.

There ARE times and places where intoxication is nearly required.

[Rollo]

50. I wore out the mute button in '16.

There might be a market for a Trump audio filter for electronics...

It's certainly technically feasible.

It's certainly socially desirable.

[tenorly]

4. Save one for me!

I'll need it.

[GReedDiamond]

8. KnR...The Yippies used to do that way back when...

...at the annual 4th of July smoke-ins in D.C.

Way before it was legal.

Now, in D.C. - like where I am now, in CA - it's legal to possess (as long as the joint hander-outers are in possession of under two ozs) and to give away, but it's probably illegal to smoke in public -- especially if it's at the inhoguration of TrumPutin.

[Cha]

14. This is like the Onion only not.. wow!

Hope they don't get into some unforeseen trouble from handing out free joints @ the inauguration of the rigged selected pervert.

Too bad they couldn't bake brownies.

[Old Vet]

15. Thanks for the memories Cha.........

Last time I ate a pot brownie was at minnewaska state park in ny, Sat and stared at a waterfall for most of the night. To this day I wonder what was really in that fucking brownie, Theres high and theres fucked up as a football bat

[Cha]

17. You're Welcome, Old Vet!

At least you remember how fucked up you were. lol

It's evoking one of my own.. @ my daughter's 10th birthday party in San Diego where we had just moved back to from North Carolina.. we had gotten a piñata in Tia Juana.. I made brownies 2 kinds and had homemade cherry ice cream.

I remember this little blond boy with curls. rubbing his eyes and crying.. "I want big people's brownies .. wanted what he couldn't have.

Those were the daze!

[hollowdweller]

25. Good to remember for a protest

<a href=".html" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo ffg.jpg"/></a>

[HoneyBadger]

26. Whichever senator or governor wants the 2020 youth vote, needs to spark up at the Inauguration

It would make the front page of every paper in the world

[Warren DeMontague]

27. Actually, they don't need to smoke it, just support it and understand it's a serious issue.

It's one of the big reasons I think Gavin Newsom is a top contender for 2020 or 2024.

[BigDemVoter]

38. I couldn't stand being there even if I was stoned off my ass.