New Bill to Legalize MJ Federally
- Thread starter deprave
- Start date
s00thsayer
Active Member
here are some news links....TOT has links in the article to contact political reps.... please do this peeps!!!
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/06/legislation_to_end_us_marijuana_prohibition_coming.php
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20073545-503544.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/22/marijuana-bill-barney-frank-ron-paul_n_882707.html
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/06/legislation_to_end_us_marijuana_prohibition_coming.php
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20073545-503544.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/22/marijuana-bill-barney-frank-ron-paul_n_882707.html
namtih024
Active Member
when did this air, wtf i live in texas, with just this statement ron paul has my full support. marijuana prohibition has been a fantastic failure in a time when america needs funds we spend soo much money to needlessly incarcerate non violent drug affenders when we can legalize cannabis and turn it into a revenue generating export and local crop. take the drug cartels and mafias out of my marijuana trade. let Americans grow for Americans (no offense canada, amsterdam, spain, and so on). ive seen first hand the west coast cannabis industries, i know one day it will be legal, but not till i can walk down the street smoking a blunt and not worry about people calling the law on me. once America is desensitized to cannabis then it will be legal.
i find it funny how the anti drug ads call themselves "above the influence" when they themselves are trying to influence people not to use drugs using no scientific facts at all but merely opinions. in actuality the studies done under president Nixon (the one who started "the war on drugs") showed that they found it unconstitutional to make marijuana illegal.
i find it funny how the anti drug ads call themselves "above the influence" when they themselves are trying to influence people not to use drugs using no scientific facts at all but merely opinions. in actuality the studies done under president Nixon (the one who started "the war on drugs") showed that they found it unconstitutional to make marijuana illegal.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
It's just going to be laughed at and stuffed in the waste bin. No one takes it seriously.
namtih024
Active Member
he introduced a bill! he didnt just say "hey we should legalize mary jane" lots of politicans say they advocate decriminalization but scince ive been smoking this is the first bill on a federal level i have seen. it can be a big deal if we dont show appathy like carne (no offence)
i voted on bill AB390 to legalize cannabis in cali. the reason it failed was because of medical users. they felt it limited there grow too much and were being greedy so they hoped a new bill would be introduced later with less growing limitations and no personal taxes. in my opinion that was stupid. the grow limits allowed for a 5x5 space (plenty for personal really) and didnt say anything about vertical limit. i would have built a stackable garden and been happy.
the problem was after the bill was rejected, medical cannabis saw a backlash, i guess the feds took it as opinion that we dont want bud legal, cause they cracked down on dispensaries. places were afraid to purchase medicine and some places had to close there doors. high profile clubs like harborside had to operate in extreme caution, and would not purchase fresh medicine for some time. it was really sad actually.
people didnt realize that prop 215 didnt really outline growing limits well either, later they introduced a revised bill AB420 which gave cali the restrictions we see today. hell if we passed AB390 im sure there would be a revision bill going through at this very moment, and the greedy "medical growers"(supposed to be non-profit by the way but they currently are in one of the only profitable industries in a ressession) would be happy.
jeff f
New Member
probably right.
what gets my goat is everyone who says that its a new "source of revenue". thats just code for saying, we in the govt are gonna totally fuck this whole thing up.
fine, legalize and stop encarcerating folks for it. save money that way. but politicians start dipping in the kitty like they have with booze, smokes, etc. soon a legal Z bag will cost 1500 bucks.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
None taken. It's not apathy it's being realistic. With Obama's attitude over the last two years this is the best we're going to get. I think this is the third time Ron Paul has teamed up with Barney Frank in introducing a legalization bill.
Correction: The other two bills were decriminalization bills introduced in 2008 and 2009.
ozman
Well-Known Member
Well,I for one like the bill so far from what I've read.What needs to happen now is for everybody and there brother,sister,mother,father, and everybody else to write to their State rep or go to norml and sign the petition there.
If there is enough voice on it they will know what is up.But we have to act now,this is the best thing to come along in 40 years for us.I think the only reason that smoker wouldnt like this bill is if they are growing and selling for the profit,then they probably wouldnt like this to get passed.But hey if you are growing for yourself then lets at least let the people in charge know how we feel as a community in this.
We shouldnt just say oh yea but nothing will happen to it,hell no nothing will happen if we take the apathy route.
Lets all get active in this one chance we have at a decent marijuana bill for us consumers and growers.I would love the chance to be able to grow my own legal weed in my back yard or in my spare bedroom and not have to worry about going to jail for it.Just think of the love and attention you could give your plants if you could walk into a hydro store and talk shop with somebody that could legally help you with a problem in your legal garden.It's a win win situation here,we get to grow our legal homegrown for our own consumption and the states save money from all the legal fees and court costs.
C'mon people get them keyboards and ink pens smoking let's let the feds know how we feel.
If there is enough voice on it they will know what is up.But we have to act now,this is the best thing to come along in 40 years for us.I think the only reason that smoker wouldnt like this bill is if they are growing and selling for the profit,then they probably wouldnt like this to get passed.But hey if you are growing for yourself then lets at least let the people in charge know how we feel as a community in this.
We shouldnt just say oh yea but nothing will happen to it,hell no nothing will happen if we take the apathy route.
Lets all get active in this one chance we have at a decent marijuana bill for us consumers and growers.I would love the chance to be able to grow my own legal weed in my back yard or in my spare bedroom and not have to worry about going to jail for it.Just think of the love and attention you could give your plants if you could walk into a hydro store and talk shop with somebody that could legally help you with a problem in your legal garden.It's a win win situation here,we get to grow our legal homegrown for our own consumption and the states save money from all the legal fees and court costs.
C'mon people get them keyboards and ink pens smoking let's let the feds know how we feel.
ozman
Well-Known Member
Well this is the best Ive found so far of it.It came from norml.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Lawmakers for the first time have introduced legislation in Congress that seeks to end the federal criminalization of the personal use of marijuana.
The measure, entitled the ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011,’ prohibits the federal government from prosecuting adults who use or possess marijuana by removing the plant and its primary psychoactive constituent, THC, from the five schedules of the United States Controlled Substances Act of 1970.
Under present law, all varieties of the marijuana plant are defined as illicit Schedule I controlled substances, defined as possessing ‘a high potential for abuse,’ and ‘no currently accepted medical use in treatment.’
The ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act’ seeks to federally deregulate the personal possession and use of marijuana by adults. It marks the first time that members of Congress have introduced legislation to eliminate the federal criminalization of marijuana since the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.
Language in this Act mimics changes enacted by Congress to repeal the federal prohibition of alcohol. Passage of this measure would remove the existing conflict between federal law and the laws of those sixteen states that allow for the limited use of marijuana under a physicians’ supervision. It would also allow state governments that wish to fully legalize and regulate the responsible use, possession, and production of marijuana for all adults to be free to do so without federal interference.
The federal criminalization of marijuana has failed to reduce the public’s demand or access to cannabis, and it has imposed enormous fiscal and human costs upon the American people. It is time to end this failed public policy and to provide state governments with the freedom to enact alternative strategies — such as medicalization, decriminalization, and/or legalization — without running afoul of the federal law. Please urge your United States Representative to co-sponsor and/or support the ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011’ by entering your zip code below.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Lawmakers for the first time have introduced legislation in Congress that seeks to end the federal criminalization of the personal use of marijuana.
The measure, entitled the ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011,’ prohibits the federal government from prosecuting adults who use or possess marijuana by removing the plant and its primary psychoactive constituent, THC, from the five schedules of the United States Controlled Substances Act of 1970.
Under present law, all varieties of the marijuana plant are defined as illicit Schedule I controlled substances, defined as possessing ‘a high potential for abuse,’ and ‘no currently accepted medical use in treatment.’
The ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act’ seeks to federally deregulate the personal possession and use of marijuana by adults. It marks the first time that members of Congress have introduced legislation to eliminate the federal criminalization of marijuana since the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.
Language in this Act mimics changes enacted by Congress to repeal the federal prohibition of alcohol. Passage of this measure would remove the existing conflict between federal law and the laws of those sixteen states that allow for the limited use of marijuana under a physicians’ supervision. It would also allow state governments that wish to fully legalize and regulate the responsible use, possession, and production of marijuana for all adults to be free to do so without federal interference.
The federal criminalization of marijuana has failed to reduce the public’s demand or access to cannabis, and it has imposed enormous fiscal and human costs upon the American people. It is time to end this failed public policy and to provide state governments with the freedom to enact alternative strategies — such as medicalization, decriminalization, and/or legalization — without running afoul of the federal law. Please urge your United States Representative to co-sponsor and/or support the ‘Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011’ by entering your zip code below.
[/FONT]
ozman
Well-Known Member
H. R. 2306
A BILL
To limit the application of Federal laws to the distribution and consumption of marihuana, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011″
SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT TO MARIHUANA.
Part A of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
SEC. 103. APPLICATION OF THIS ACT TO MARIHUANA.
No provision of this Act shall be construed to affect Federal drug testing policies, and each Federal agency shall conduct a review of its drug testing policies not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act to ensure that the language of any such policy is in accordance with this section.
Here is the source I got it from
http://prohibitionsend.com/2011/06/23/text-of-bill-hr-2306-ending-federal-marijuana-prohibition-act-of-2011/
A BILL
To limit the application of Federal laws to the distribution and consumption of marihuana, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011″
SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT TO MARIHUANA.
Part A of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
SEC. 103. APPLICATION OF THIS ACT TO MARIHUANA.
- PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN SHIPPING OR TRANSPORTATION. -This Act shall not apply to marihuana, except that it shall be unlawful only to ship or transport, in any manner or by any means whatsoever, marihuana, from one State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, into any other State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or from any foreign country into any State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, when such marihuana is intended, by any person interested therein, to be received, possessed, sold, or in any manner used, either in the original package or otherwise, in violation of any law of such State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
- PENALTY. -Whoever knowingly violates sub-section (a) shall be fined under title 18, United States 26 Code, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
- REMOVED FROM SCHEDULE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. -Schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812(c)) is amended
- by striking marihuana; and
- by striking tetrahydrocannabinols.
- REMOVAL OF PROHIBITION ON IMPORT AND EXPORT. -Section 1010 of the Controlled Substances Importand Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960) is amended
- by striking subparagraph (G) of subsection(b)(1);
- by striking subparagraph (G) of subsection(b)(2); and
- by striking paragraph (4) of subsection (b).
- Section 102(44) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(44)) is amended by striking marihuana.
- Part D of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841 et seq.) is amended as follows:
- In section 401
- by striking subsection (b)(1)(A)(vii);
- by striking subsection (b)(1)(B)(vii);
- by striking subsection (b)(1)(D); and
- by striking subsection (b)(4).
- In section 402(c)(2)(B), by striking marihuana
- In section 403(d)(1), by striking marihuana
- In section 418(a), by striking the last sentence
- In section 419(a), by striking the last sentence
- In section 422(d), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking marijuana.
- In section 422(d)(5), by striking , such as a marihuana cigarette,
- In section 401
No provision of this Act shall be construed to affect Federal drug testing policies, and each Federal agency shall conduct a review of its drug testing policies not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act to ensure that the language of any such policy is in accordance with this section.
Here is the source I got it from
http://prohibitionsend.com/2011/06/23/text-of-bill-hr-2306-ending-federal-marijuana-prohibition-act-of-2011/
RyanTheRhino
Well-Known Member
and if it is to much to by from the store why don't u just grow it. you can grow tobacco, and brew your own beer. as long as you don't sell it you don't need to pay taxes.
deprave
New Member
They can't tax it, thats why its stayed illegal for so long ,they make much more money from it being illegal, let them think they can tax it if that's what it takes, ill be laughing all way from my grow room to my drying room. Marijuana is a lot easier to grow then tobacoo and also much easier then brewing alcohol
Cali chronic
Well-Known Member
Here is the link to send a letter to your Law makers. Vote or Die!
http://www.capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=50800581
http://www.capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=50800581
CaRNiFReeK
Well-Known Member
Why can't they tax it? Because it is natural? Peanuts are natural. When I buy peanuts, I pay taxes on everything associated with them. From the fuel that goes into the agriculture process, to the sales tax at the register.
Why can't they tax it? Because you are gonna grow it yourself? When I brew my own beer for personal use, I am taxed on everything associated with it. From the water to the propane used to boil the wort.
You can bet everything associated with it will be taxed. Every single lumen in your grow room will be taxed! The headlines will be something like: "Marijuana Legalization Causes Electricity Shortages Across America. Utility Providers Forced to Raise Rates." The fear mongering that legalization would cause would soon have many non growers begging the government to protect them from rising energy costs.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
It's plain and simple. Marijuana arrests fuel the War on Drugs. Most of the funding for this "war" comes from the success rates of marijuana busts. You don't want to kill the cash cow when it's bringing in so much money. Marijuana will stay a schedule one drug until the pain of the problem overcomes the pain of the solution. That means when we start having the drug related murder rates going on in Mexico right now.
namtih024
Active Member
the war on drugs is only profitable for those employed by it. sure i was arrested three times for possession, and had to bail out hire attourneys, pay probationary fees, court cost and pretty much whatever the state thought i should pay. i did a total of 25 days in county jail but paid some $20,000 in fees over a seven year period. this seems like alot (and believe it, to me it was/ is) but its nothing compared to the 40 somthing billion spent this year alone on the war on drugs. not to mention the cost of keeping an inmate(most offenders in prisons are in there for non-violent drug offences) paying officers to arrest people when they could be better spending there time arresting rapist and murderers, court cost (paying judges, DA s , pretty much the whole justice department) we waste taxpayer money on these things, people who have never commited a crime or picked up a joint pay out of there pocket for the war on drugs. the only people who profit are those who make a livelihood from it. you better beleive that the DEA wants it to stay illegal, because if this bill passes they will be limited to boarder patrol, which we already have, so by just keeping the DEA at that point would be a waste of money and eventually they would be disbanneded or reassigned. same goes with all drug specific task forces, court rehabilitaion centers, drug courts etc.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
This bill is intriguing because it changes everything, but at the same time changes nothing.
Essentially it is returning to the states the power to decide for themselves whether to re-legalize, as it should have always been anyway.
After the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed, the states were persuaded by Harry Anslinger to enact their own prohibitions of cannabis.
So, even if this bill manages to become law, the states will be free to decide for themselves. The question is: Will they decide to re-legalize?
In California, the answer was "No."
Even now, the remnants of alcohol prohibition are still with us in the form of dry counties. Which is fine because the federal government is not dictating to the county, the county commissioners decide for themselves.
So, this huge because the bill recognizes the state's responsibility to decide on the matter as per the 10th Amendment; but it could have no real impact at all should the individual states reject re-legalization.
Hopefully, some will decide to re-legalize cannabis.
But we must convince Congress to pass it. No easy feat.
Now is a great time to consider joining a cannabis advocacy group like NORML or the MPP.
Essentially it is returning to the states the power to decide for themselves whether to re-legalize, as it should have always been anyway.
After the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed, the states were persuaded by Harry Anslinger to enact their own prohibitions of cannabis.
So, even if this bill manages to become law, the states will be free to decide for themselves. The question is: Will they decide to re-legalize?
In California, the answer was "No."
Even now, the remnants of alcohol prohibition are still with us in the form of dry counties. Which is fine because the federal government is not dictating to the county, the county commissioners decide for themselves.
So, this huge because the bill recognizes the state's responsibility to decide on the matter as per the 10th Amendment; but it could have no real impact at all should the individual states reject re-legalization.
Hopefully, some will decide to re-legalize cannabis.
But we must convince Congress to pass it. No easy feat.
Now is a great time to consider joining a cannabis advocacy group like NORML or the MPP.
ozman
Well-Known Member
Here is a link to page to follow the bill and you can see who is on the committees to pass it on or not.I have 1 rep in the committee .
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-2306
But I kinda agree with johnnyorganic,but either way its a start.I have been writing my state reps for a long time the most response I get from them is IT'S AGAINST FEDERAL LAW.So if that is taken from the equation then they will have to come up with another lame ass excuse not to end prohibition.
Lets keep the good fight going.Hold their feet to the fire.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-2306
But I kinda agree with johnnyorganic,but either way its a start.I have been writing my state reps for a long time the most response I get from them is IT'S AGAINST FEDERAL LAW.So if that is taken from the equation then they will have to come up with another lame ass excuse not to end prohibition.
Lets keep the good fight going.Hold their feet to the fire.