Light up if you got 'em: Federal legislation to remove penalties on personal pot

[Dakota Valkyrie]

My first foray into "Three Things". Given the fondness I know some have for the topic, I wonder if there will even be a debate...
Here goes:

Legislators aim to snuff out penalties for pot use

The U.S. should stop arresting responsible marijuana users, Rep. Barney Frank said, announcing a proposal to end federal penalties for Americans carrying fewer than 100 grams, almost a quarter-pound, of the substance.

Current laws targeting marijuana users place undue burdens on law enforcement resources, punish ill Americans whose doctors have prescribed the substance and unfairly affect African-Americans, said Frank, flanked by legislators and representatives from advocacy groups.

House Resolution 5843, titled the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008, would express support for "a very small number of individuals" suffering from chronic pain or illness to smoke marijuana with impunity.

If HR 5843 were passed, the House would support marijuana smokers possessing up to 100 grams -- about 3½ ounces -- of cannabis without being arrested. It would also give its blessing to the "nonprofit transfer" of up to an ounce of marijuana.

The resolution would not address laws forbidding growing, importing or exporting marijuana, or selling it for profit. The resolution also would not speak to state laws regarding marijuana use.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/...ana/index.html
(the article wanders into other marijuana legalization issues but those are not effected by this bill)

Summary of HR 5843 from Franks office: http://www.house.gov/frank/hr5843summary.html

Text of bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.5843:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no penalty may be imposed under an Act of Congress for the possession of marijuana for personal use, or for the not-for-profit transfer between adults of marijuana for personal use. For the purposes of this section, possession of 100 grams or less of marijuana shall be presumed to be for personal use, as shall the not-for-profit transfer of one ounce or less of marijuana, except that the civil penalty provided in section 405 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 844a) may be imposed for the public use of marijuana if the amount of the penalty does not exceed $100.

__________________________________________________ _______________

The intention of the bill is to only effect the states that already allow medical marijuana use. While states allow the use, it is illegal at a federal level and some are arrested on that basis. Putting this into law at the federal level woud eliminate that. The states are: California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon.

My personal thoughts aside, questions come up:

• With Federal legalization, will other states follow re-think and allow medical use?
• Is there a loophole in there? Wording says "personal use" without mention of medical.
• Is this the first round of legalization of all marijuana use?
• Dose it make sense to leave it illegal to grow or import?
• If you can't get it for free and pay for it, will you still get arrested?
• Are those pesky anti-cigarette people going to jump on this too?
• Is this just a "feel good" ploy by a politician with no chance of passage?

hmmm....

[Athena]

Great thread, Dakota. :)

The intention of the bill is to only effect the states that already allow medical marijuana use. While states allow the use, it is illegal at a federal level and some are arrested on that basis. Putting this into law at the federal level woud eliminate that. The states are: California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon.

Washington State also allows for medical marijuana, thanks to I-692 which was approved in '98 by roughly 60% of the popular vote. Unfortunately, however, because doctors fear federal prosecution, not much pot is ever prescribed. We do have Green Cross, though. Federal decriminalization would be huge for this state. :)

• With Federal legalization, will other states follow re-think and allow medical use? I believe so. I imagine many of the more liberal states would act to decriminalize marijuana entirely or for medical use, but consider it a fruitless effort so long as it is banned federally.
  
• Is there a loophole in there? Wording says "personal use" without mention of medical. I think that's actually preferable. 100 grams is 100 grams, no matter why you've got it (unless it's bagged for distribution, I assume). Furthermore, I feel like the spirit of this legislation is to discourage the feds from butting unnecessarily into the states' jurisdiction.
  
• Is this the first round of legalization of all marijuana use? Do you mean, is there more to come or if similar legislation has previously been considered? Yes to both. Similar bills have been drafted and rejected (as this likely will be), but there will be more. Marijuana will not stay criminalized.
  
• Dose it make sense to leave it illegal to grow or import? Not really but absolutely. If this legislation is too aggressive, it'll never pass. This legislation is meant more to portray a mindset and affect change that way than to severely limit the scope of law enforcement.
  
• If you can't get it for free and pay for it, will you still get arrested? I don't believe so. The bill appears to focus the responsibility for such transactions on the for-profit distributer, rather than the purchaser.
  
• Are those pesky anti-cigarette people going to jump on this too? In theory, it's a similar issue, but I'm confident that the anti-cigarette people are already focused on more than they can handle and probably won't give pro-pot people much difficulty.
  
• Is this just a "feel good" ploy by a politician with no chance of passage? Oh, I think it's genuine. After all, it's co-sponsored by my man Ron Paul. These guys feel seriously about limiting the functions of the federal government and letting responsible citizens do their thing. Will it pass? Probably not. But we have to keep trying. It's the direction the country is going anyway, whether the feds like it or not. They'll give up eventually.

[w8ng4msrgt]

Is this just a "feel good" ploy by a politician with no chance of passage?

No chance in hell in an election year.

[Pete Bondurant]

We do have Green Cross, though. Federal decriminalization would be huge for this state.

What would be huge for your state, would be the influx of filthy, unemployed losers who sit around doing nothing but smoking marijuana all day...every day. Look at Amsterdam. That place went to hell.

[impqueen]

What would be huge for your state, would be the influx of filthy, unemployed losers who sit around doing nothing but smoking marijuana all day...every day. Look at Amsterdam. That place went to hell.

“But the Dutch speak four languages and smoke marijuana!”

“Yes, but they’re cheating! Everyone knows marijuana is a drug enhancement, that can help you in track and field, to come last in a team of eight million…eight million other runners who are all dead.” - the god Izzard

I always rather thought the Dutch went to hell because you could pay to watch a Great Dane rape a child there. I mean, i know it's not like smoking pot or anything, but that seemed more hellworthy to me.

But then, I'm a little bit libertarian about pot smoking - I choose not to smoke weed, but I find it much less harmful overall than alcohol, methamphetamine, or myriad other substances with which people choose to medicate themselves. I think we as a nation have way, way bigger problems than marijuana consumption, and if we'd just legalize pot and tax the stuff we'd solve a lot of them.

[Athena]

What would be huge for your state, would be the influx of filthy, unemployed losers who sit around doing nothing but smoking marijuana all day...every day. Look at Amsterdam. That place went to hell.

Amsterdam has become a pitiful city for a ton of reasons, least of all being their stance on marijuana, in my opinion. If anything, Amsterdam illustrates the problem with creating an island of lax drug policy. Imagine if all of Western Europe exercised such policy. Amsterdam wouldn't stand out at all. That's not to say that all of these countries would become as downtrodden as Amsterdam is today, of course. Amsterdam experiences difficulty for being a mecca. If it were suddenly ordinary, trouble makers would be spread out rather than focused in a single area.

That would be exactly the case with the west coast. If this legislation were adopted at the federal level, all west coast states would share similar policy.

All that being said, Seattle has already all but decriminalized marijuana possession (years ago, we made it the "lowest criminal priority" and arrests for marijuana possession plummeted). Naysayers anticipated dire consequences, including increased crime, increased usage, increased dropout rates, etc. Nothing they predicted has happened.

[Pete Bondurant]

All that being said, Seattle has already all but decriminalized marijuana possession (years ago, we made it the "lowest criminal priority" and arrests for marijuana possession plummeted).

I was in Seattle at one time, Pioneer Square. There were filthy, begging, drug-addicted bums everywhere. Just like Amsterdam.

[Athena]

I was in Seattle at one time, Pioneer Square. There were filthy, begging, drug-addicted bums everywhere. Just like Amsterdam.

Oh, you mean like every other major city in America? :p Personally, I believe welfare is more to blame for creating those types than drug policy could ever be.

[Pete Bondurant]

Oh, you mean like every other major city in America? :p Personally, I believe welfare is more to blame for creating those types than drug policy could ever be.

Fuck it all. I'd shoot them anyway. Filthy, useless vermin. Cut the welfare and shoot the drug addicts. This is a simple policy and life would be better for the nation as a whole.

[Athena]

Fuck it all. I'd shoot them anyway. Filthy, useless vermin. Cut the welfare and shoot the drug addicts. This is a simple policy and life would be better for the nation as a whole.

Simple, huh? Who defines "drug addict"? :p

[Pete Bondurant]

Simple, huh? Who defines "drug addict"? :p

I will make these decisions. Submit to my authority. Consume vast quantities of alcoholic beverages as you do so. Obeisance to me will be a reward unto itself.

[impqueen]

I will make these decisions. Submit to my authority. Consume vast quantities of alcoholic beverages as you do so. Obeisance to me will be a reward unto itself.

Dommy much? ;)

Masochist to sadist: "Ooh, baby, spank me hard.".

Sadist to masochist: "No."

[Pete Bondurant]

Dommy much? ;)

Masochist to sadist: "Ooh, baby, spank me hard.".

Sadist to masochist: "No."

I was referring to my political authority. All of this S & M nonsense is for people who are too boring to have real personalities.

[Athena]

I will make these decisions. Submit to my authority. Consume vast quantities of alcoholic beverages as you do so. Obeisance to me will be a reward unto itself.

Well, I did hit up Trader Joe's just last night for a 6 pack of wine. Will I have to wear a dress? They just renovated the mall nearest me, so I really don't want to have to go shopping. I mean, it may have a Sephora, now, but the place is a madhouse.

You don't want my submission, really. It tends toward creepy. "Obeisance" is a fantastic word, though. Figures you'd be an immigrant.

[Mandella]

Legalize. And then hook me up with some of that Maui-Wowie. ASAP

[brokenandtwisted]

Didn't Canada already do this?

[Dark Star]

Dakota, glad you posted this. Right on.

Mr. Hip was trying to get me to post information about this, but I've been trying for months to get him to sign on as a Demon since, he lurks a good bit of the time anyway.... LOL so I told him to join and post it. (shit fire, I am sure he'll be glad you did it) :)

Everyone knows my feeling on pot & drugs in general around here.

Marijuana=Medication

[Athena]

Quit lurkin', Mr. Hip! Come on out where we can see ya!