New Congressional Bill on Mary Jane

[morty20]

ZERO liklihood that this passes, but here you go:
H.R. 5843, The Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults

hxxp://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_5843.html

[xhilaration]

Re: New Congressional Bill on Mary Jane

Originally posted by morty20
ZERO liklihood that this passes, but here you go:
H.R. 5843, The Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults

hxxp://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_5843.html

Are you fucking KIDDING ME LOL,

BOO FUCKING HOOOOO ! lol

[pixiefied]

H.R. 5843 is described as an "Act to Remove Federal Penalties for Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults". The bill has been introduced by US Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and co-sponsored by US Presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX). If passed, this legislation would legalize the possession, use and non-for-profit of up to 100 grams (3.5 ounces) of Marijuana. Under this legislation, adults who consume Marijuana would no longer face arrest, prison or civil fines.

This bill will not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of Marijuana for profit, nor the import, export and cultivation of Marijuana. It will also not alter the legal status of Marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug according to the Controlled Substances Act.
Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 4/17/2008: Referred to House committee. Status: 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.
Points in Favor

- States Rights: Allows states to decide if and how they wish to prosecute possessors of small quantities of Marijuana. By eliminating federal penalties for such possession, the Commerce Clause will no longer pre-empt state law with respect to low-level possession.

- Cost: Would reduce cost of federal law enforcement efforts that are disproportionate to the alleged cost of self-harm. Law enforcement resources should be used to prevent harm-to-others, not self-harm.

- Law Enforcement: Allows law enforcement to more thoroughly address activities that cause harm-to-others by relieving officers, agents, prosecutors, and judges of legal duty to enforce a law which has been enacted to prevent harm-to-self.

- Personal Liberties: Live and let live. The bill would allow states to determine whether people should be able to use marijuana in the privacy of their home. So long as the users aren't harming anyone, it is extremely offensive to brand them as criminals and force them to live in fear.
Points Against

- Action Required at State Level: The bill would divest the federal government of authority to prosecute low-level possession, but state laws would still need to be changed for responsible users to be protected, except potentially in Alaska.


never happen

[fc*uk]

Come on. Lets be real.

Unless you got kg quantities on you or are stupid enough to spark a joint like you would spark a cig in public, do police officers really fucking care? No.

Does anyone? No.

[ryan]

I got kicked out of my apartment in PA because I had maybe one gram of pot. The cops just gave me a ticket. (Which I never paid, I just moved back to TN)

My landlord set me up. He was trying to bust my roomate (well former roomate, he had moved into his own apartment a few days prior). He was selling pot\cocaine, and had just sold two ounces (pot) before we picked him up. We dropped him off at his apartment, and BOOM the cops and our landlord pulled up.

The next day me and my then girlfriend crammed all of our crap into her little Hyundai and drove back here. Where she was soon impregnated by my best friend.

Long story short. Pot saved me from getting that slut pregnant.

I'd shit a brick if this passed. Although it would alleviate some of the paranoia that comes along with smoking pot.

[PaperClip]

Legalize it already. It's my belief that when teenagers or adults go through drastic lengths to hide their use of something, you have more of a hazard on your hands.

[watadoo]

I'll vote for wacky tabbacy anytime!

[deeder7001]

I don't want it legalized. Somebody I work with smokes that stuff and is always messing around and doesn't do any work especially when he's high.

[watadoo]

So you want to punish everyone else 'cause you work with a chump? Newsflash: this co-worker will shirk work no matter if he's smoking, drinking or sober as a judge. And there is someone like him on nearly every job you'll ever have. another newsflash. Just cause it's legalized doesn't mean it will be allowed at work. For instance, you likely can't come to work drunk can you?

[deeder7001]

Originally posted by watadoo
So you want to punish everyone else 'cause you work with a chump?

I'm punishing everybody else because they're breaking the law?

I just don't want to go to work one day and five people decided to come in high just because it got legalized. They would probably get fired but the rest of us sober people will take all the responsibility for their jobs until we get replacements. As if I didn't already work hard enough for minimum wage.

[xzxzzx]

Originally posted by deeder7001
I don't want it legalized.

Originally posted by deeder7001
I'm punishing everybody else because they're breaking the law?

I don't think your thought process was in full swing, here.

[deeder7001]

Probably true that my thought process wasn't full swing. May never be full swing by everyone else's standards.

I'm still sticking to not wanting it legalized.

[PaperClip]

Just because it's legalized doesn't mean it's allowed in the workplace. Alcohol is legal, and I'm pretty sure you can't show up to work drunk. All the same restrictions as alcohol would apply, I assume even more rules would be created so we can eliminate accidental contact highs as well.

You can take a non-legalization stance. Just trying to let you know it won't be done carelessly.

Originally posted by deeder7001
I'm punishing everybody else because they're breaking the law?

I just don't want to go to work one day and five people decided to come in high just because it got legalized. They would probably get fired but the rest of us sober people will take all the responsibility for their jobs until we get replacements. As if I didn't already work hard enough for minimum wage.

[deeder7001]

Several people were fired for getting drunk while at work at another store in town.

Since we're kind of on the subject, why does anybody smoke this stuff? I know of the medical part but that's about it.

[xzxzzx]

deeder7001: The point is that you were begging the question.

"I don't want it legalized because people use it which is wrong because it isn't legal!"

:P