←back to thread

US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

(apnews.com)
662 points JacobHenner | 2 comments | 30 Apr 24 17:32 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mannyv ◴[30 Apr 24 18:15 UTC] No.40214223[source]▶
One major effect of this is that weed stores will be able to use banks and payment processors legally once the regulators catch up.
replies(17): >>40214302 #>>40214371 #>>40214681 #>>40214723 #>>40214802 #>>40214840 #>>40215087 #>>40215094 #>>40215242 #>>40215259 #>>40215926 #>>40216092 #>>40216174 #>>40217047 #>>40217090 #>>40218919 #>>40227379 #
andrewxdiamond ◴[30 Apr 24 18:24 UTC] No.40214371[source]▶
A lot of them have wiggled around this problem by offering “atms” at the cash register. You pay with a debit card, but it’s not a normal transaction, it’s an ATM withdrawal! I don’t understand how the money is vended to the business, but it keeps it out of the store
replies(8): >>40214632 #>>40214642 #>>40214762 #>>40214782 #>>40214788 #>>40214845 #>>40217657 #>>40218370 #
ethbr1 ◴[30 Apr 24 18:55 UTC] No.40214782[source]▶
Signs that times are a' changing -- you can buy illegal drugs with a card now.

(Call me crazy and old-fashioned, but I don't think I'd want 50+ illegally-correlated transactions on my financial record that the government could lump into other charges...)

replies(2): >>40214810 #>>40217737 #
coffeebeqn ◴[30 Apr 24 18:58 UTC] No.40214810[source]▶
Do they have jurisdiction to go and do that?
replies(3): >>40215051 #>>40215076 #>>40216079 #
denimnerd42 ◴[30 Apr 24 19:17 UTC] No.40215076[source]▶
sure they do. for example it's illegal to be in possession of marijuana and a firearm. the purchase of said MJ would be pretty good evidence that could lead to other warrants. That's the Hunter Biden gun charge.
replies(2): >>40215232 #>>40217690 #
beaeglebeachh ◴[30 Apr 24 19:31 UTC] No.40215232[source]▶
It's oddly not. Only to be a user or addict with a firearm. IIRC if you just like the way weed looks in your hand that doesn't make you a user, and there's plenty of reasonable doubt you're guarding it for grandma or whoever.

Of course people are still being convicted of weed and firearm, but it gets recorded as gun law violation and nobody cares, cuz left hates guns and right hates weed, so they'll never repeal it.

replies(3): >>40215381 #>>40217738 #>>40219680 #
1. somenameforme ◴[01 May 24 05:01 UTC] No.40219680{3}[source]▶
What you're saying is how people generally think the law works, but it's not how it works in practice. This is easily illustrated with possession of drug paraphernalia charges. There's two types of possession, actual and constructive - but both face the exact same charge. Constructive just means something like 'could be reasonably accessed.'

So imagine you're in a car, get pulled over, it smells of weed so the cop executes a search, and he finds a pipe in the glove compartment. You're getting arrested for PDP there 100%. Even if it genuinely wasn't yours, you stand very little chance of acquittal. Beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean 'is there some other viable explanation' because there literally always is. It means is it reasonably likely that one of these other explanations is what really happened.

replies(1): >>40222016 #
2. beaeglebeachh ◴[01 May 24 11:54 UTC] No.40222016[source]▶
What you're saying is how people generally think the prohibited possessor law works, but it's not how it works in practice. It says nothing of drug possession, only gun/ammo possession by someone who uses or addicted to illegal drugs. There is plenty of reasonable doubt that constructive or actual possession of drugs is not accompanied by use, in fact this is the case for many dispensary workers.

>922 g (3) ... who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));