USA - Bill introduced in Congress to decriminalize marijuana!

[lulz]

Please contact your representatives if you live in the United States

Today, a bill to eliminate all federal penalties for marijuana possession was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Would you please take one minute to ask your U.S. representative to support this bill? MPP’s easy online action system makes it simple — just enter your name and contact info and we'll do the rest.

"The Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008," introduced by Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), would eliminate the threat of arrest and prison for the possession of up to 3.5 ounces of marijuana and/or the not-for-profit transfer of up to one ounce of marijuana. It would not affect federal laws prohibiting selling marijuana for profit, importing and exporting marijuana, or cultivating marijuana. It also would not affect any state or local laws and regulations.

Because almost all marijuana arrests are made by local and state police, the primary impact of this federal bill is twofold: First, it would offer protection to people who are apprehended with marijuana in federal buildings or on federal land (such as national parks); and, second, the bill sends a message to state governments that the federal government is now open to the notion of states reducing their marijuana penalties, too.

This historic legislation comes 36 years after the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse made a similar recommendation to President Richard Nixon, suggesting that he decriminalize small amounts of marijuana.

MPP has worked closely with Congressman Frank’s staff over the last year, helping to craft the legislation and build political support for the proposal on Capitol Hill.

Now that the bill has been introduced, members of Congress need to hear from their constituents who want to see it passed. It takes only a minute or two to use MPP’s online action system to send a quick note to your member of the House.

Thanks so much for your help.

Sincerely,

Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.

P.S. As I've mentioned in previous alerts, a major philanthropist has committed to match the first $3.0 million that MPP can raise from the rest of the planet in 2008. This means that your donation today will be doubled.

http://mpp.convio.net/site/MessageViewer?em_id=7421.0

[fnord]

Wow... Didn't think i would be seeing this for a while! Good find!

Ok you stoner's stop giggling mindlessly to spongebong hemp pants episodes put the wacky tobacy down and LISTEN UP just because this has hit congress doesn't mean its going to pass,it needs YOUR HELP for that to happen,dont know what to do? Well you can call/write your local senator,you can publish editorials in your local newspaper,get your friends involved ETC.

Heres a good first step:

1. Call Congress: You can reach your member of Congress by dialing the U.S. House switchboard operator at (202) 225-3121 and asking the operator to connect you to your representative. A staff member or intern will take your message and relay it to your representative. You can say:

My name is [your name] and I am calling from [your town, your state]. I wanted to ask the representative to please support Barney Frank's Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act.

This legislation was introduced this week and I would greatly appreciate the representative's support.

Please remember to be polite and brief.

Hang up flyers around your local university's/wherever letting others know about this.

fnord added 530 Minutes and 51 Seconds later...

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/...NEWS/804060373

WASHINGTON — Proponents of U.S. Rep. Barney Frank's proposal to legalize small amounts of marijuana are pointing to efforts in some states — including Massachusetts — to decriminalize the drug as evidence of public support for Rep. Frank's plan.Rep. Frank, D-Mass., said recently that he will introduce two bills, one that would decriminalize possession of less than 100 grams — or 3.5 ounces — of marijuana and another that would grant protection to states that decide to allow medicinal use of marijuana.

"The public is now ready for this," Rep. Frank said in a telephone interview. "I have long thought it was foolish to have these laws on the books, but now as I look at the public opinion, it's clear that this is wanted."

Rep. Frank said that although he does not support marijuana use, he believes that adults should be able to consume small amounts without facing criminal penalties. He said prosecution of marijuana charges costs federal law enforcement agencies time and resources. Rep. Frank, who said he has no experience with marijuana, added, "I think marijuana is less harmful than alcohol."

As Rep. Frank tries to drum up support for his bill in Congress, the Massachusetts Legislature is considering an initiative to decriminalize possession of an ounce or less of marijuana. A person caught with an ounce or less would be fined but would not be charged with a criminal offense, which appears on employer background checks and is a disqualifying factor for receiving certain government benefits, such as subsidized housing and student financial aid.

If the state Legislature does not act on the initiative by May 6, supporters have until June 18 to get 11,000 signatures on a petition to put the initiative on the ballot in November. If they succeed, it would require a majority vote to pass.

Whitney A. Taylor, campaign manager for the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, which drafted the Massachusetts initiative, said she supports Rep. Frank's proposal.

"We are very excited that Congressman Frank understands the need for more sensible and sound marijuana policies," Ms. Taylor said. "The policies in Massachusetts do more harm than good, and I think the congressman realizes that on a federal level, as well."

State Sen. Patricia D. Jehlen, D-Medford, is sponsoring her own bill that would decriminalize possessing an ounce or less of marijuana.

"I'm not saying it's OK, but it's not a criminal offense," she said. "It's a civil offense, but you don't get a criminal record and you don't use up court resources."

State Rep. Martin J. Walsh, D-Dorchester, who has led the opposition to marijuana decriminalization in Massachusetts, said he would instead favor adjusting laws for youths using alcohol and marijuana in order to protect their permanent records.

"People make mistakes," Rep. Walsh said. "I don't agree with them being penalized for an irresponsible decision."

Since 1973, 12 states, including Maine, have decriminalized marijuana in some form. A bill that would decriminalize possession of a quarter-ounce of marijuana passed the New Hampshire House, although the governor and Senate president have vowed to defeat it.

"Almost half of the (U.S.) population lives in states that have done this sort of thing," said Bill Downing, president of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition. "Those states saved millions of dollars in law enforcement and marijuana usage rates did not go up as a result."

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, pointed to those 12 states as proof of support for reforming drug laws. Mr. St. Pierre said there is widespread public support for decriminalizing marijuana and allowing for its medicinal use, although many still oppose its full legalization.

Americans are able to distinguish between decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana and the complete legalization of marijuana, making it like alcohol and tobacco, Mr. St. Pierre said.

Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said his agency would "oppose any changes that would make dangerous, addictive drugs widely available."

"Common sense shows that when you make something more available, people will use it," he said.

Mr. Riley said that proponents of marijuana decriminalization are "using medical marijuana as a back-door solution to legalization," and that marijuana is a more harmful drug than people realize. He said patients using medicinal marijuana are being used to invoke public sympathy.

"The state-level passage has been playing on people's good wills more than based on science," Mr. Riley said. "They go through the ballot process rather than the scientific process."

For the past 10 years, Rep. Frank has unsuccessfully filed legislation during each two-year congressional term to loosen marijuana laws. He has filed bills that would allow the unrestricted medicinal use of marijuana in states that have passed such laws, and he also has filed bills — one as recently as January — to repeal a law that prohibits college students who were convicted of drug offenses from receiving financial aid. None of the bills has made it onto the House floor for debate.

U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., filed legislation in the Senate last month that would allow judges to decide whether students who were convicted of drug offenses can keep their financial aid.

Tom Angell, spokesman for Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a Washington-based lobbying group seeking to decriminalize marijuana, said more than 200,000 college students have lost financial aid in the past 10 years because of drug convictions.

Although Mr. Angell would not say whether he would support Rep. Frank's legislation until he sees the details of his proposal, he said he believes passing a law to reduce penalties for marijuana will "show a lot of momentum for reforming punitive drug policies."

"Congress will be on the record saying it doesn't make sense to punish people for what they're putting into their own body," Mr. Angell said.

Mr. St. Pierre said Rep. Frank's proposal does not promote the use of marijuana but instead encourages people who use it to consume the drug within reasonable limits.

"It will build consistency into drug policy that if you use something like cannabis, just like alcohol, you should largely be punished for the abuse of the substance, not the use of it," Mr. St. Pierre said.

"We all know there's a difference between use of alcohol and alcohol abuse."

[Panthers007]

Barney Frank himself knows it has no chance of passing. He didn't write it to pass. Hence he left out minor details, such as what a small quantity of marijuana would be.

The idea is to bring the insanity to peoples' attention. Good 'ol Barney.

[fnord]

i thought it was 100 grams? How many other times has he tried this? i know its been a few,isnt there another bill thats working on being passed also along these lines?

Can anyone find this bill number or more info on it?

Originally Posted by fnord

Can anyone find this bill number or more info on it?

HR 5843 is the bill mentioned here (the one he's co-sponsoring). HR 5842 is the bill that Ron Paul is sponsoring for Med MJ.

Ill post the full text of the bill when it comes online tuesday.


why arnt more people excited about this?

Just found more info!

Summary of HR 5843

An Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults,” sponsored by U.S. Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass.), would eliminate federal penalties for the possession or not-for-profit transfer of small amounts of marijuana. The bill would remove federal penalties at the federal level only: (1) possession of up to 100 grams of marijuana and (2) the not-for-profit transfer of one ounce (28.3 grams) of marijuana. Additionally, this legislation would provide for a civil penalty of $100 for the public use of marijuana.



FEDERAL LAW IS BEHIND THE TIMES

The federal government should remove the current conflict with state law and allow states to decide on these matters for themselves. Eleven states have laws that significantly reduce penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana,1 in many cases providing for a mere civil fine.

Federal law should reflect the reality of the circumstances. Approximately 99% of marijuana arrests happen at the state and local level. Aside from a few isolated instances, the federal government generally does not arrest, prosecute, or even fine people for possession of “small amounts” of marijuana.

Law enforcement agencies should focus on the real criminals anyway. Given continuing special agent shortages at the DEA and the abiding threat of the violent criminal drug trade at the border, our scarce resources should be spent where they are most needed.

WHAT THE BILL WILL NOT DO

 It would not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of marijuana for profit, import and export of marijuana, or manufacturing (cultivating) marijuana.

 It would not legalize major drug dealing or create obstacles for agents of the federal government seeking to prevent major drug dealing.

 It would not affect any state or local laws and regulations.

 It would not alter the legal status of marijuana as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et. seq.).



The states are: California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon.

[Panthers007]

I see he's refined a few things. Must have been the dressing-down he's been getting from an otherwise supportive local (Massachusetts) media. They were hinting that even his supporters were having trouble with this bill - unless he made a few revisions such as defining "small amounts."

[Bajeda]

Weren't there two bills introduced? HR 5842 and HR 5843.

Heres an article on HR 5842...



Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act Introduced Yesterday in Congress

HR 5842 would reschedule marijuana for medical use, end federal interference in state laws


WASHINGTON, DC - April 18 - Congressional Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) introduced the "Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act," HR 5842, yesterday, a bill co-sponsored by Representatives Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Sam Farr (D-CA), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), and Ron Paul (R-TX). The act would change federal policy on medical marijuana in a number of ways. Specifically, HR 5842 would reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug, which cannot be prescribed, to a Schedule II drug, which would recognize the medical value of marijuana and create a regulatory framework for the FDA to begin a drug approval process for marijuana. The act would also prevent interference by the federal government in any local or state run medical marijuana program.

Similar versions of HR 5842 have been introduced in prior Congressional terms, but have never made it out of committee. "It's time that the federal government take this issue seriously," said Caren Woodson, Government Affairs Director with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a nationwide medical marijuana advocacy group working with Mr. Frank and other Members of Congress to change federal policy. "By disregarding marijuana's medical efficacy, and undermining efforts to implement state laws, the federal government is willfully placing hundreds of thousands of sick Americans in harms way."

In addition to rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), HR 5842 would provide protection from the CSA and the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) for qualified patients and caregivers in states that have legalized the use of medical marijuana. Specifically, the act prevents the CSA and FDCA from prohibiting or restricting: (1) a physician from prescribing or recommending marijuana for medical use, (2) an individual from obtaining, possessing, transporting within their state, manufacturing, or using marijuana in accordance with their state law, (3) an individual authorized under State law from obtaining, possessing, transporting within their state, or manufacturing marijuana on behalf of an authorized patient, or (4) an entity authorized under local or State law to distribute medical marijuana to authorized patients from obtaining, possessing, or distributing marijuana to such authorized patients.

In December, U.S. House Judiciary Chair John Conyers stated publicly his concern about the tactics being used by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and promised oversight hearings. Since then, several California mayors have written to Conyers expressing their support for hearings, including the mayors of San Francisco, Oakland, West Hollywood, and Santa Cruz. Opposition to federal interference in state medical marijuana laws has also come from multiple city councils, members of the California Board of Equalization and the state legislature, as well as New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson.

Further information:

Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, HR 5842: http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/HR5842.pdf
ASA Fact Sheet on the Escalation of Harmful DEA Tactics: http://americansforsafeaccessnow.org...escalation.pdf
December 2007 Statement by House Judiciary Chair John Conyers: http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=889
Letter from San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to Conyers: http://www.americansforsafeaccessnow...to_Conyers.pdf
Letter from NM Governor Richardson to President GW Bush: http://safeaccessnow.org/downloads/richardson_letter.pdf

http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0418-03.htm

[Nacumen]

This will increase sales for drug dealers because more people will want weed, because they know they wont be screwed over for having it. Weed needs to be completely legalized, not just for possession but also for sale and manufacture, before it will be given any respect.

[Expat98]

Update: A Missouri congressman has signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill introduced by Rep. Barney Frank.

Missouri Congressman Backs Bill To Decriminalize

May 5, 2008

Washington, D.C. -- A bill that would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana is garnering support from Missouri Rep. William Lacy Clay.

Clay, a Democrat from St. Louis, has signed on as a co-sponsor of the measure to eliminate federal penalties for possessing up to 100 grams — or about 3.5 ounces — of marijuana for personal use.

The measure also would remove penalties for the not-for-profit transfer of up to 1 ounce of marijuana between adults.

"I certainly don't approve of drug use, but we need to stop wasting tax dollars on prosecuting small personal marijuana users in federal court," Clay said Monday. "We have wasted billions of dollars on a phony war on drugs that is filling up our prisons and failing to stop the flow of illegal narcotics into this country."

Clay is one of only three lawmakers currently supporting the bill, introduced last month by Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat. Clay called the bill "a reality check" that would allow law enforcement "to fight real threats to public health and national security."

The other co-sponsor is Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a former Republican presidential candidate.

One hundred grams of marijuana would make about 120 to 130 individual cigarettes, according to Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a legalization advocacy group.

He compared that amount to one person buying a few cases or a keg of beer for personal use.

St. Pierre said the measure is the first time in more than 20 years that a federal measure supporting decriminalization has been introduced in Congress.

"A very large group of people around the country that want to see marijuana laws reformed now have something that you can talk about with your representative at the local level," St. Pierre said.

When he introduced the bill, Frank called the prosecution of marijuana smokers a waste of law enforcement resources, particularly the targeting of those who use marijuana as a legal medical treatment under California law.

"If the law I am proposing passes, states will still be free to treat marijuana as they wish," Frank said. "But I do not believe that the federal government should treat adults who choose to smoke marijuana as criminals."

Frank also has offered a separate measure that would grant protection to states that allow medicinal use of marijuana. About a dozen states have legalized medical marijuana use, but federal law considers all forms of marijuana illegal.

Tom Riley, a spokesman for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said the decriminalization bill shows "an embarrassing understanding of the way law enforcement works on this issue" and predicted it would gain very little support.

"This idea that we're spending scarce law enforcement dollars chasing after college kids with a couple of joints in their pocket is ludicrous," Riley said.

He said the average inmate convicted under federal marijuana possession laws had more than 100 pounds of the drug, not just an amount for personal use.

Riley also called marijuana "a serious drug of abuse for teens" that is not just a gateway to more potent drugs, but a serious problem on its own.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Sam Hananel, The Associated Press
Published: May 5, 2008

[fnord]

When they say not for profit transfers would be decriminlized,would it be legal if john doe buys an ounce off jane doe for the same price she paid for it?

Also what if someone started growing it just to give it away?

[psyche]

Whaat? When my eyes first hit the title I started checking my calendar to see if it's april. Not that it would likely pass, but it's a newsbomb by itself which must bring up some controversy about the issue. This just made my day.

When they say not for profit transfers would be decriminlized,would it be legal if john doe buys an ounce off jane doe for the same price she paid for it?

Also what if someone started growing it just to give it away?

 It would not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of marijuana for profit, import and export of marijuana, or manufacturing (cultivating) marijuana.

So cultivating would be illegal. Also sales of any kind would most likely be made illegal since it's not possible to know if the person grew them himself or really paid the same price. I think any kind of transporting of marihuana to others would be considered dealing.

[aerozeppelin123]

Originally Posted by psyche

So cultivating would be illegal. Also sales of any kind would most likely be made illegal since it's not possible to know if the person grew them himself or really paid the same price. I think any kind of transporting of marihuana to others would be considered dealing.

Seems like cultivating would be illegal without a doubt, but I disagree about the transporting marijuana to others. If they specified that the not-for-profit transfer of up to an ounce was ok, then it would be up to them to prove that you did make profit or that it was more than an ounce, not up to you to prove that you didn't do that. Innocent until proven guilty and all that

[psyche]

Seems like cultivating would be illegal without a doubt, but I disagree about the transporting marijuana to others. If they specified that the not-for-profit transfer of up to an ounce was ok, then it would be up to them to prove that you did make profit or that it was more than an ounce, not up to you to prove that you didn't do that. Innocent until proven guilty and all that

Yeah, you're right. Just thought it'd be too unbelievable if they let the law pass in a form that would practically allow dealing marihuana, since it'd eat much resources to prove the origin of weed.

[aerozeppelin123]

Originally Posted by psyche

Yeah, you're right. Just thought it'd be too unbelievable if they let the law pass in a form that would practically allow dealing marihuana, since it'd eat much resources to prove the origin of weed.

Yeah I'm surprised that they would include the part about allowing small transfers in the bill, because in reality that would legitimise all small scale deals, whether for profit or not. This is because it would never be possible to prove a profit was made since there is no record of the sale and you could easily just say 'I sold it for the same amount I bought it', even if that's not true. Hope it passes though, even though I'm not from America would be good to see progress being made somewhere in the world. I have my doubts though

[AddyCrazy]

I love how Riley states "This idea that we're spending scarce law enforcement dollars chasing after college kids with a couple of joints in their pocket is ludicrous," For one law enforcement dollars are far from scarce especially any drug related enforcement and second one of the ladies in the article stated how over 200,000 college students have lost financial aid over drugs and it wouldn't surprise me if a good percentage was marijuana because most drug arrests are marijuana anyway. Sometimes I can't even read things like this because the people who say its bad piss me off to the point where I want to just meet them face to face, grab their cheeks and scream LOOK AT THE DAMN FACTS!!

[RaverHippie]

the Massachusetts Legislature is considering an initiative to decriminalize possession of an ounce or less of marijuana. A person caught with an ounce or less would be fined but would not be charged with a criminal offense, which appears on employer background checks and is a disqualifying factor for receiving certain government benefits, such as subsidized housing and student financial aid.

If the state Legislature does not act on the initiative by May 6, supporters have until June 18 to get 11,000 signatures on a petition to put the initiative on the ballot in November. If they succeed, it would require a majority vote to pass.

Interesting developments for massachusetts then. I've always wanted initiative, referendum, and recall at the national level. Easiest ways to see public opinion enacted into policy.

[curious1]

Well SWIMs congressman emailed SWIM with a nice little letter thanking him for sharing SWIMS opinions and how meth is bad and how he is trying to get as much prevention programs into the schools....

He didn't mention marijuana though

Atleast SWIM got a message back. He believed that it was going into the black hole of the trash bin. SWIM wonders if a secretary wrote the email.

[chrisn]

I've heard this bill is stuck in committee hell now, anyone have a source for this?

[lulz]

Apparently this link gives you an update of the official status:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...0:HR05843:@@@X

As of right now it seems to have been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. I'm not quite sure what that implies, perhaps someone in the U.S. could elaborate?

P.S. in looking up that link, on a number of sites I read posts from people who emailed a member of congress about this and got a reply about it. If anyone wants to get some positive rep, I'm pretty sure posting an actual reply from a member of congress about this would do the trick.

[AquafinaOrbit]

House Committee on Energy and Commerce is part of the U.S. House of Representatives. Basically they are the branch that tells the house about commerce, public’s health, and marketplace interests.

Anyway, I don't see it going through. Guess no publicity is bad publicity though.

[Greenport]

Originally Posted by Panthers007

Barney Frank himself knows it has no chance of passing. He didn't write it to pass. Hence he left out minor details, such as what a small quantity of marijuana would be.

The idea is to bring the insanity to peoples' attention. Good 'ol Barney.

I agree with you - that is a wise analysis of the situation IMO. It was mentioned that this is the first time in 20 years a bill such as this has been introduced into congress.

The facts are that 44.8% of 12th graders in 2005 have tried pot at least once in their lifetime. And also, unlike the issues our parents faced where the younger generation was mostly strongly for pot decriminalization and the older were more strongly against it -- today the younger and aging crowds are together starting to see the big picture. This is an overwhelming amount of support. The number of marijuana smokers probably outdoes the number of people who have used other, legal drugs such as vicodin. In some states, it has become one of the most important cash crops, despite its illegal status.

As a result, sure it may not be 'this' bill that legalizes freedom, but if it fails another will be written, and another, and another, until people either severely limit the use of marijuana or it is legalized through the system.

Oh yeah...TOM RILEY IS FULL OF SHIT - A propagandist at work if I ever heard one!

Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said his agency would "oppose any changes that would make dangerous, addictive drugs widely available."

"Common sense shows that when you make something more available, people will use it," he said.

Mr. Riley said that proponents of marijuana decriminalization are "using medical marijuana as a back-door solution to legalization," and that marijuana is a more harmful drug than people realize. He said patients using medicinal marijuana are being used to invoke public sympathy.

"The state-level passage has been playing on people's good wills more than based on science," Mr. Riley said. "They go through the ballot process rather than the scientific process."

For one, they do too use the scientific process. There is more scientific proof of marijuana's health benefits today than there has been for years, thanks in part to the decriminalization of the drug in other developing countries allowing actual research to be carried out legally by people other than government scientists.

The fact is that in America, it is still illegal to do research on the drug. Thus any 'scientific' evidence practiced was done underground and any information that did spread that way was never 'official'. How are people supposed to use the scientific process in court to legally prove its safety? It's exactly those kinds of corruptive practices that keep things stuck the way they are in this country (god, don't get me started about oil!)

So of course marijuana supporters are first going to support bills that would aid the marijuana legalization in the long run - because introducing "let's legalize marijuana 100% right now" on a bill just doesn't work. Our point of view is to show people that the drug is useful and safe, and that by just giving people accurate facts instead of filling their heads with lies and propaganda, like they did in the 1930s (think Reefer Madness -- most people didn't even know that "marijuana" was the same plant as hemp and thus saw it, as a result of the propaganda, as a dangerous "menace to society".)

What if it were alcohol on the stand and not marijuana? Would Tom Riley support it then? Does alcohol fit into his classification of a dangerous and addictive drug? Or does he see it as safe and non-addictive? What about alcoholics? People who die from alcohol? All the car crashes related to alcohol? In comparison to alcohol, marijuana would be the safer choice, and I hope that asshole says something stupid to get himself caught up in his bullshit.

[AquafinaOrbit]

Alcohol had it's ban though, the government just lost that battle. Marijuana is different because the government won the battles. I agree though, stepping stones is what we need.

[lulz]

Banning alcohol required a Constitutional amendment. There hasn't been a constitutionalist American president since the war on drugs started. The real legal battles haven't been fought over the war on drugs yet.

This is a cause that will inevitably be won. It'll either start with American legal reform, or America will cease to be a global superpower (which, given economic trends, is not up for debate but simply a matter of time).

[Expat98]

Looks like this bill has now picked up a couple more co-sponsors. Here is the current list. All democrats with the exception of Ron Paul.

Rep Frank, Barney [MA] (Sponsor)
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI]
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO]
Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA]
Rep Paul, Ron [TX]

This bill does not stand a real chance, but it will be interesting to track its progress and see how it ends up and where exactly it gets shot down.

[TranceAddict]

This is something I saw on another forum and thought it would be important to have here!

Today, a bill to eliminate all federal penalties for marijuana
possession was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Would you please take one minute to ask your representative to support this bill?
MPP’s easy online action system makes it simple — just enter your name and contact
info and they'll do the rest.

"The Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008," introduced by
Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), would eliminate the threat of arrest and prison
for the possession of up to 3.5 ounces of marijuana and/or the not-for-profit transfer
of up to one ounce of marijuana. It would not affect federal laws prohibiting selling
marijuana for profit, importing and exporting marijuana, or cultivating marijuana. It
also would not affect any state or local laws and regulations.

Because almost all marijuana arrests are made by local and state police, the primary
impact of this federal bill is twofold: First, it would offer protection to people who are
apprehended with marijuana in federal buildings or on federal land (such as national
parks); and, second, the bill sends a message to state governments that the federal
government is now open to the notion of states reducing their marijuana penalties,
too.

This historic legislation comes 36 years after the National Commission on Marihuana
and Drug Abuse made a similar recommendation to President Richard Nixon,
suggesting that he decriminalize small amounts of marijuana.

MPP has worked closely with Congressman Frank’s staff over the last year, helping to
craft the legislation and build political support for the proposal on Capitol Hill.

Now that the bill has been introduced, members of Congress need to hear from their
constituents who want to see it passed. It takes only a minute or two to use MPP’s
online action system to send a quick note to your member of the House.

Now, take just one moment to [click here]
and send a message to your representative
supporting this new legislation.


If you can spare an additional two minutes, make a phone call!

• You can reach your member of Congress by dialing the U.S. House switchboard
  operator at (202) 225-3121 and asking the operator to connect you to your
  representative (click here to lookup your representative). A staff member or
  intern will take your message and relay it to your representative. You can say:

  My name is [your name] and I am calling from [your town, your state].
  I wanted to ask my representative to please support Barney Frank's
  Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act.
  

If you believe non-violent marijuana users should stay out of jail...
If you believe the federal government should set precident on this issue...
If you want to do what you can to help make this a reality...

[jsknow]

There is enough wrong with the drug laws to fill a library with information. It's time to take the profit out of the illegal drug trade that's created by prohibition. Take away the money and then deal with the real drug problems but the prohibition problems are easy to fix! Regulate instead of prohibit.

It's time to remove all the politicians that promote prohibition.
How many more lives have to be needlessly devastated or lost?
Prohibited drugs are way easier for kids to get than regulated drugs!
Prohibition never works it just causes crime and violence.

The USA spends $69 billion a year on the drug war, builds 900 new prison beds and hires 150 more correction officers every two weeks, arrests someone on a drug charge every 17 seconds, jails more people than any nation and has killed over 100,000 citizens in the drug war.

In 1914 when there were no prohibited drugs 1.3% of our population was addicted to drugs, today 1.3% of our population is still addicted to drugs but there’s way more crime and violence because of the huge profits prohibition generates. Drugs today are more potent, more readily available and less expensive than they were in the early 70’s when Richard Nixon started the war on drugs.

“Jury Nullification”, learn more here: http://fija.org If you are called for jury duty and you don’t agree with the law the person is charged with, you have the right to vote not guilty, no matter what evidence is produced. Jurors implementing this right in all non-violent drug cases will shut down the ridiculous laws of prohibition. One juror in each case is all it takes. The bottom line is a juror has the right to judge not only the accused person but the law the person is accused of breaking. Don’t be intimidated stick to your position.

There’s only been one drug success story in history, tobacco, by far the most deadly and one of the most addictive drugs. Almost half the users quit because of regulation, accurate information and medical treatment. No one went to jail and no one got killed.

The right; to freedom of religion, free speech, a free press, to keep and bear arms, to be secure in your person, house, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizure, to life, liberty and property, to be protected from having your property taken by the government without due process of law and without just compensation, to confront the witnesses against you, to be protected from excessive bail, excessive fines, cruel and unusual punishment, to vote and many others have been denied to millions of Americans in the name of the drug war.