Legislators aim to snuff out penalties for pot use

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Nov 21, 2007
839
0
0
41
#1
(CNN) -- The U.S. should stop arresting responsible marijuana users, Rep. Barney Frank said Wednesday, announcing a proposal to end federal penalties for Americans carrying fewer than 100 grams, almost a quarter-pound, of the substance.
Rep. Barney Frank's bill would radically curb federal penalties for personal marijuana use.

Rep. Barney Frank's bill would radically curb federal penalties for personal marijuana use.

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, Frank said, flanked by legislators and representatives from advocacy groups.

"The vast amount of human activity ought to be none of the government's business," Frank said during a Capitol Hill news conference. "I don't think it is the government's business to tell you how to spend your leisure time."

The Massachusetts Democrat and his supporters emphasized that only the use -- and not the abuse -- of marijuana would be decriminalized if the resolution passes.

Allen St. Pierre, spokesman for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, likened the proposal to current laws dealing with alcohol consumption. Alcohol use is permitted and the government focuses its law enforcement efforts on those who abuse booze or drive under its influence, he said.

"We do not arrest and jail responsible alcohol drinkers," he said.

St. Pierre said there were tens of million of marijuana smokers in the United States, including himself, and hundreds of thousands are arrested each year for medical or personal use. iReport.com: Is it time to legalize pot?

There have been 20 million marijuana-related arrests since 1965, he said, and 11 million since 1990, and "every 38 seconds a marijuana smoker is arrested."

Rob Kampia, director of the Marijuana Policy Project, said marijuana arrests outnumber arrests for "all violent crimes combined," meaning that police are spending inordinate amounts of time chasing nonviolent criminals.

"Ending arrests is the key to marijuana policy reform," he said.

Reps. William Lacy Clay, D-Missouri, and Barbara Lee, D-California, said that in addition to targeting nonviolent offenders, U.S. marijuana laws also unfairly target African-Americans.

Clay said he did not condone drug use, but he opposes using tax dollars to pursue what he feels is an arcane holdover from "a phony war on drugs that is filling up our prisons, especially with people of color."

Too many drug enforcement resources are being dedicated to incarcerating nonviolent drugs users and not enough being done to stop the trafficking of narcotics into the United States, he said.

Being arrested is not the American marijuana smoker's only concern, said Bill Piper of the Drug Policy Alliance Network. Those found guilty of marijuana use can lose their jobs, financial aid for college, their food stamp and welfare benefits or their low-cost housing.

The U.S. stance on marijuana, Piper said, "is one of the most destructive criminal justice policies in America today."

Calling the U.S. policy "inhumane" and "immoral," Lee said she has many constituents who are harassed or arrested for using or cultivating marijuana for medical purposes. California allows medical marijuana use, but the federal government does not, she explained.

House Resolution 5843, titled the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008, would allow "a very small number of individuals" suffering from chronic pain or illness to smoke marijuana with impunity. The legislation is cosponsored by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas.


According to NORML, marijuana can be used to treat a range of illnesses, including glaucoma, asthma, multiple sclerosis, HIV/AIDS and seizures.

Frank said there were about a dozen states that already had OK'd some degree of medical marijuana use and the federal government should stop devoting resources to arresting people who are complying with their state's laws.

In a shot at Republicans, Frank said it was strange that those who support limited government want to criminalize marijuana.

Asked if the resolution's passage would change his personal behavior, Frank quipped, "I do obey every law I vote for," but quickly said he did not use marijuana, nor does he encourage it.

"I smoke cigars. I don't think other people should do that. If young people ask me, I would advise them not to do it," he said.
advertisement

If HR 5843 were passed by the House, marijuana smokers could possess up to 100 grams -- about 3½ ounces -- of cannabis without being arrested. It would also permit the "nonprofit transfer" of up to an ounce of marijuana.


The resolution would not affect laws forbidding growing, importing or exporting marijuana, or selling it for profit. The resolution also would not affect any state laws regarding marijuana use.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/30/frank.marijuana/index.html
:cool:

in a nutshell., other states will be able to get canabis cardz like in cali..
 
May 1, 2003
6,431
25
0
52
#3
Doesn't that last sentence negate the entire story?

No. Weed shops in California wont' have to worry about getting raided by the Feds. and Weed shops in states where it's not legal can still be banked with local laws and fines. So in other words let the states deal with it as they see fit.


Keep track of the progress of the bill here

Sponsor:Rep. Barney Frank [D-MA]show cosponsors (7)
Cosponsors [as of 2008-07-06]
Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D-WI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. William Clay [D-MO]
Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA]
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]
Rep. James McDermott [D-WA]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date. Why?

Bill Text:Summaries (CRS)
Full Text
Status:
IntroducedApr 17, 2008
Scheduled for Debate-
Voted on in House-
Voted on in Senate-
Signed by President- This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills go first to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills never make it out of committee. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. [Last Updated: Jul 5, 2008]
Last Action:Apr 28, 2008: House Judiciary: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Show All Related Votes

Sponsor:Rep. Barney Frank [D-MA]show cosponsors (7)
Cosponsors [as of 2008-07-06]
Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D-WI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. William Clay [D-MO]
Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA]
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]
Rep. James McDermott [D-WA]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date. Why?

Bill Text:Summaries (CRS)
Full Text
Status:
IntroducedApr 17, 2008
Scheduled for Debate-
Voted on in House-
Voted on in Senate-
Signed by President- This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills go first to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills never make it out of committee. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. [Last Updated: Jul 5, 2008]
Last Action:Apr 28, 2008: House Judiciary: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Show All Related Votes
so far it's only been introduced. Last step is being signed by Bush....OR.....Obama! :)
 
Aug 9, 2006
6,298
56
48
35
#5
Doesn't that last sentence negate the entire story?
since your from new york, yeah, your local black and whites can still arrest you...but here in cali we would stop worrying for good


things like this have been brought up before.....there may be a slightly better chance it gets passed on to the senate because its a democtaticly run house but i still doubt it
 

BASEDVATO

Judo Chop ur Spirit
May 8, 2002
8,623
20,808
113
44
#7
I'd be very disappointed if Obama vetoed that bill... you know Republicans are gonna shit all over it, might not make it far
 
Aug 9, 2006
6,298
56
48
35
#8
I'd be very disappointed if Obama vetoed that bill... you know Republicans are gonna shit all over it, might not make it far
did you pay attention in school? it has to PASS threw the house to then be PASSED to the senate.....then the senate has to PASS it to PASS it to the president.....its no where near the presidents desk yet fool....and obama isnt even president haha wtf
 

BASEDVATO

Judo Chop ur Spirit
May 8, 2002
8,623
20,808
113
44
#9
MooreShit maybe educate yourself and read complete sentences...

you know Republicans are gonna shit all over it, might not make it far (as in congress)

meaning house and senate (R)'s probally wont let it get to president desk... and yes I'm calling the win for Obama


you trying way to hard...