An End to Federal Prohibition..

[NorCalHal]

Well, all the debates over the last few days here might just be for naught.


Washington, DC: Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank, along with co-sponsors Ron Paul (R-TX); Maurice Hinchey (D-NY); Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA); and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), will reintroduce legislation today to limit the federal government’s authority to arrest and prosecute minor marijuana offenders

The measure, entitled an “Act to Remove Federal Penalties for Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults,” would eliminate federal penalties for the personal possession of up to 100 grams (over three and one-half ounces) of cannabis and for the not-for-profit transfer of up to one ounce of pot – making the prosecutions of these offenses strictly a state matter.
Under federal law, defendants found guilty of possessing small amounts of cannabis for their own personal use face up to one year imprisonment and a $1,000 fine.
Passage of this act would provide state lawmakers the choice to maintain their current penalties for minor marijuana offenses or eliminate them completely. Lawmakers would also have the option to explore legal alternatives to tax and regulate the adult use and distribution of cannabis free from federal interference.
To date, thirteen states have enacted laws ‘decriminalizing’ the possession of marijuana by adults. Minor marijuana offenders face a citation and small fine in lieu of a criminal arrest or time in jail.
“The federal government has much more important business to attend to than targeting, arresting and prosecuting adults who use marijuana responsibly,” NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre said. “This is an issue that ought to be handled by the states, not the Feds.”
According to nationwide polls, three out of four voters believe that adults who possess marijuana should not face arrest or jail, and one out of two now say that cannabis should be regulated like alcohol.
The reintroduction of the Frank/Paul bill comes one week after the duo reintroduced HR 2835, The Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act of 2009 – which seeks to halt federal interference in states that have enacted medical marijuana laws – and just days after Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) called for federal legislation to sentence certain first-time marijuana offenders to 25 years in prison.
“The US Congress has a definite choice,” said St. Pierre. “They can choose the path of compassion, fiscal responsibility, and common sense by supporting Barney Frank’s and Ron Paul’s efforts, or they can continue down America’s failed drug war path by endorsing Rep. Kirk’s draconian legislation. It is abundantly clear which direction the voters wish to go; will their elected officials follow?”
Additional information about the ‘Act to Remove Federal Penalties for Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults’ is available at NORML’s Take Action Center.

 

[cubby]

People who support current federal MJ laws are going the way of the dinosaur. When you look at the political chasm that has been bridged over this subject it's incredible. Being something of a political junkie I'm amazed that Rep. Barney Frank and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher can come to an agreement on anything. Looking at the support this subject is recieving it's apparent that there is a new mindset on drug laws in general an MJ in particular, about time IMO. It seems that most politicians have accepted the fact that regardless of how much MJ smokers are demonized, ostrisized, or dismissed as slackers/losers, we make up a large and politicly active group of Americans. They can no longer just ignore our concerns as a fringe issue.
We will, at least for the near future, have to contend with people like Rep Kirk who believe that incarceration is a legitimate response to people who wish to exercise our personal rights as adults in a free country.
I will be sending E-mails to these congressional reps. stating my appreciation and support for their efforts on this issue. It's my oppinion that letting congressional members know of your support is well recieved, don't we all like a pat on the back when deserved? When people from outside of a Reps. district say thanks it lets them know that their input and support gets noticed on a national level.
We have a long way to go in the fight for total freedom from prohibition but these congressmen/women are at least heading in the right direction.

 

[phatpharmer]

It sounds like the good ol USA is getting smarter when it comes to MJ laws they seem to be on the path to legality, where as here in Canada we seem to be going backwards this new bill C-15 is going to be hell to say the least, I mean 6 months jail for one plant thats crazy talk if you ask me! The only hope I have is Canada (I hate to say it but) usually kisses the US's *** so if the US legalizes it I think Canada will surely follow, just my opinion fell free to give your opinion as well!

Phatpharmer:hubba:

 

[R00T BOUND]

here in Canada we seem to be going backwards this new bill C-15 is going to be hell to say the least, I mean 6 months jail for one plant

Phatpharmer:hubba:

Really? 6 mo. wow, I thought Canada was legal OR at least very lenient, only certain areas I assume...

 

[AcesUp]

Norcal - What do you mean it may be for naught?

 

[PencilHead]

Federal laws won't discourage Florida nor coax her out of the cave. The state's run by big bottomed cretins and a blow-up doll governor, Pretty Boy Charlie.

I posted a Seattle article on the new Drug Czar. Anyone got anything on him?

 

[SPEARCHUCKER]

Kirk is nothing. Not even a speedbump in the road to deal with. With all the data going against him (example:US already has 1/5th of the entire worlds prison population) Im sure all Washington is getting a good laugh at his 1945 politics.

Doubt Franks measure will amount to anything at the moment either. But its great to see the attention.

For Canada. Did that C-15 bill pass? I thought it was going to dieout.
Be nice if passed. Everyone in Canada growing calls the police on themselves. See if they know what to do with 100k people at once. Theyd stop that bill the next day.

 

[SPEARCHUCKER]

Yea PH. He recently got humiliated by Rolling Stone.

An Embarrassing Interview With the Drug Czar
Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly Version Email this Article Email this Article
Posted in Chronicle Blog by Scott Morgan on Mon, 06/15/2009 - 10:24pm

Rolling Stone's June issue takes an in-depth look at the evolving political climate surrounding drug policy (a portion is available online), including a deliciously embarrassing visit with drug czar Gil Kerlikowske. Remember Kerlikowske's recent statement about not calling it a "war on drugs" anymore? Well, guess what he's got in his office:

…despite this sudden outbreak of sanity, rumors of the drug war's death are greatly exaggerated. Visitors to the drug czar's office in Washington – formally known as the Office of National Drug Control Policy – are greeted by the visage of Uncle Sam on a poster declaring, WE ARE AT WAR. ARE YOU DOING ALL YOU CAN?

You really couldn’t ask for a better exhibit in the total incoherence and rank dishonesty of the drug czar's claim that our drug policy isn’t a war. I don't blame him for trying and it's certainly encouraging that we've reached a point at which the drug war is so controversial that they're trying to change its name. But how could they possibly forget to take down the damn sign? I mean, really, did they forget that Rolling Stone was stopping by?

The story goes on to brilliantly juxtapose Kerlikowske's law-enforcement credentials against his comical inability to answer basic questions about the issues he works on:

Yet when faced with questions about national drug policy, he can turn as evasive as Sarah Palin without a teleprompter. Does the tripling of marijuana arrests since 1990 represent good policy? He'd like to look at the issue more closely. Would the feds respect the laws of states that vote to legalize marijuana consumption for adults? A great question, he says – but one he won’t venture to answer. Does the U.S. experience with Plan Columbia provide a template for dealing with the violent cartels in Mexico? He just doesn't know. "After three weeks, I'm still finding my way around the office," he says with a laugh.

The whole thing is a brutal embarrassment and a vivid illustration of the appalling intellectual bankruptcy that characterizes the government's position on drug policy in general. These are extremely basic policy questions, but they have serious implications. If you can't even begin to make informative statements about federal policy, then what right do you have to dismiss calls for reform? Is there even a shred of legitimacy to Kerlikowke's opposition to legalization if he can't even tell us what the current policy is supposed to be?

We spend billions of dollars and imprison millions of people in honor of this great anti-drug crusade and the people running the whole thing in Washington can’t even figure out what to call it, let alone give us a straight answer about why any of this is in the best interest of the nation. In fairness, Kerlikowske's reluctance to defend or even discuss drug policy is a product of the reform movement's success at politicizing the issue and his silence likely owes more to caution than bald ignorance. Still, one is generally considered to have won the debate when their opponent refuses to speak.

At this point, I'd only be mildly surprised to see these guys just clam up entirely and announce that our drug policy can't be publicly discussed for national security reasons.

 

[phatpharmer]

Really? 6 mo. wow, I thought Canada was legal OR at least very lenient, only certain areas I assume...

The bill hasn't passed through the house as of yet but its only a matter of time I believe, its not legal anywhere in canada, you can posses an oz and only get a fine but I believe any more than that your goin to be in some trouble!

Phatpharmer:hubba:

 

[NorCalHal]

Norcal - What do you mean it may be for naught?

There has been some debate with fellow posters and the thought of the felow poster was that the way MMJ is handled in California will in fact be the demise of Federal Decrim. with no possibility due to how Clubs operate in our state.
Looks like that poster is wrong....again.

Will it pass? Maybe. This ONLY passes on the way MJ is handled to the States. Say a State like Florida, they may choose to keep the State laws how they are currently, keeping it criminalized. It just does away with Federal intervention in States that have Decrim laws on thier books.