You know, I bet the people smart enough to be responsible with it are smart enough not to be caught. Bit of a stupid front to use.
just about to post this. God Bless America. I cant believe I'm supporting Rep. Barney Frank!!!
I cant wait to have a toke walking down Main Street. It will pass within the next ten years, IMO.
I cant wait to have a toke walking down Main Street. It will pass within the next ten years, IMO.
I havent been caughtUS Congress wrote:
H.R. 5843: Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults
Bill Status
Introduced: Apr 17, 2008
Sponsor: Rep. Barney Frank [D-MA]
Status: Introduced
Introduced in House: This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration.
Text of Legislation
HR 5843 IH
110th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 5843
To eliminate most Federal penalties for possession of marijuana for personal use, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 17, 2008
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts (for himself and Mr. PAUL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To eliminate most Federal penalties for possession of marijuana for personal use, 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 `Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults'.
SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN MARIJUANA-RELATED PENALTIES.
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 old timey Democrats and pretty much every half way conservative republican is going to be against this. I wouldn't be surprised to see a filibuster on this if it gets out of hand. Bush would probably veto it as well if it passes while he's in office. Barack, I'm not so sure about but he would probably veto it as well so people would not criticize his prior uses.
i have to agree with this. although legalization would be greatFlaming_Maniac wrote:
You know, I bet the people smart enough to be responsible with it are smart enough not to be caught. Bit of a stupid front to use.
I wouldn't say that's true. While I've never been caught, I know people who are what I would consider to be responsible who've been caught.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
You know, I bet the people smart enough to be responsible with it are smart enough not to be caught. Bit of a stupid front to use.
What counts as being responsible with it? Having a spliff in a park on a nice sunny day is a good way of getting caught. It's also something I do fairly regularly. Travelling on public transport or being in central London, they often have sniffer dogs - having weed in your pocket and being in central London, is that irresponsible? In fact apart from driving while intoxicated, going to work or some other official type activity while stoned or leaving it around so kids could get their hands on it, I find it hard to think of anything that could be construed as being irresponsible with it.
This will never fly that long, like the spruce goose.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
Why?SgtHeihn wrote:
This will never fly that long, like the spruce goose.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
The DUI bit I can understand a bit, due to increased availability, but corporate policy? Why would that change? Presumably they already have something in there saying don't come to work drunk or under the influence of drugs, which would still apply.
Getting stoned and driving is not recommended, but it dosent lead to a significant rise in DUI or accidents, again I dont recommend it, but if anything you drive slower. Also, making new laws does not include the inconvenience, for public or private corporations, of rewriting their policies. It's still the companie's domain to inact any policy deemed necessary.SgtHeihn wrote:
This will never fly that long, like the spruce goose.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
so really it would still be illegal(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
Getting stoned and driving is not recommended, but it dosent lead to a significant rise in DUI or accidents, again I dont recommend it, but if anything you drive slower. Also, making new laws does not include the inconvenience, for public or private corporations, of rewriting their policies. It's still the companie's domain to inact any policy deemed necessary.SgtHeihn wrote:
This will never fly that long, like the spruce goose.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
I'm no lawyer, but this doesn't sound like legalization to me. This sounds more like federal decriminalization of possession/use of marijuana where the amount is considered for personal use.
I still don't see this not making it illegal at the state level, if the state should so decide.
I still don't see this not making it illegal at the state level, if the state should so decide.
I don't care about the use or misuse. It's just plain stupid to keep it illegal. Risk of use isn't really any more dangerous than using alcohol and even IF(?) there is an increased health risk, like increased risk of cancer, smoking cancer causing cigarettes is legal as well just as alcohol is legal. The main reason to legalize it IMO is to stop clogging the court system and jails with mere-substance-users.Bertster7 wrote:
Why?SgtHeihn wrote:
This will never fly that long, like the spruce goose.
If it was ever made legal, some asshats would fuck it all up(DUI) plus, it would cause every corporation in the country to re write their policy manuals.
The DUI bit I can understand a bit, due to increased availability, but corporate policy? Why would that change? Presumably they already have something in there saying don't come to work drunk or under the influence of drugs, which would still apply.
"The vast amount of human activity ought to be none of the government's business," Rep. Frank, the bill writer. +1
Again, I can believe that I agree with him 100%. I say again God Bless America.
Right, its not making it legal, but every 38 seconds someone in America is busted with marijuana. That is a ridiculous stat! I firmly believe it's not the governments place to tell me what I can and cant do to my body. Just like drinking alcohol, getting a tattoo, what kind of food I can eat, etc, etc. They have made a law, in this case marijuana possession illegal, into something criminal. I believe its a Natural Law that they have made illegal.
Again, I can believe that I agree with him 100%. I say again God Bless America.
Right, its not making it legal, but every 38 seconds someone in America is busted with marijuana. That is a ridiculous stat! I firmly believe it's not the governments place to tell me what I can and cant do to my body. Just like drinking alcohol, getting a tattoo, what kind of food I can eat, etc, etc. They have made a law, in this case marijuana possession illegal, into something criminal. I believe its a Natural Law that they have made illegal.
When I was in county jail over night, 3/4 of the people their where their for drugs.
And if you cut 75% of the number of people in county jail.........SgtHeihn wrote:
When I was in county jail over night, 3/4 of the people their where their for drugs.
Isn't that a really good thing for the tax payer?
I am not arguing for or against. I could care less if it were. I am just pointing out that drugs are still a major problem here.Bertster7 wrote:
And if you cut 75% of the number of people in county jail.........SgtHeihn wrote:
When I was in county jail over night, 3/4 of the people their where their for drugs.
Isn't that a really good thing for the tax payer?
i agree. legalize pot, save us some tax money.
Legalize and regulate pot... make some tax money....usmarine wrote:
i agree. legalize pot, save us some tax money.
and free up the tax money spent in the jails.Turquoise wrote:
Legalize and regulate pot... make some tax money....usmarine wrote:
i agree. legalize pot, save us some tax money.
next question....
what age? 18? 21?
I say 21.
what age? 18? 21?
I say 21.
Very much so...usmarine wrote:
and free up the tax money spent in the jails.Turquoise wrote:
Legalize and regulate pot... make some tax money....usmarine wrote:
i agree. legalize pot, save us some tax money.
18... same as cigarrettes. Alcohol should also be 18.usmarine wrote:
next question....
what age? 18? 21?
I say 21.
Bout time.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
well, alcohol is not 18. so, i think mj should be 21 also.Turquoise wrote:
18... same as cigarrettes. Alcohol should also be 18.usmarine wrote:
next question....
what age? 18? 21?
I say 21.
i dont think you are looking at it correctly turq.
you get a dui for driving while drinking and being high. you dont get busted for cigs and driving. hence the age should be the same
you get a dui for driving while drinking and being high. you dont get busted for cigs and driving. hence the age should be the same