Congress to increase penalties for marijuana-related offenses

marijuana.com ^ | 11.20.03 | Steve Fox

[freepatriot32]

Can you imagine a bill that intentionally forces marijuana users to inhale a greater amount of tar and carbon monoxide? What about a bill that dramatically increases penalties on medical marijuana providers who develop high-quality strains of marijuana for seriously ill patients?

The Drug Sentencing Reform Act, scheduled to be introduced by U.S. Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) within the next few days, would accomplish these "goals." Please call your U.S. representative today and urge him or her not to cosponsor this bill. See below for details about how to do this.

While the most prominent objective of this bill is to ensure that individuals convicted of drug-related offenses in federal court receive the longest possible prison sentences, the bill would also -- for the first time in history -- increase penalties for marijuana producers based on THC levels. For example, under the provisions of this bill, a medical marijuana provider in California convicted in federal court for possession of just 33 plants with a THC content of between 13 and 25 percent would be sentenced "to a term of imprisonment which may not be less than 5 years." Previously, a 5-year mandatory minimum applied to the possession of more than 100 plants.

By dramatically increasing penalties on the distribution of marijuana with higher THC content, this bill would ensure that lower-quality marijuana is sold to children (and adults, of course). This will not decrease the number of Americans smoking marijuana; it will simply increase the amount of tar and carbon monoxide inhaled by Americans while they are smoking.

Members of Congress must understand that their constituents support harm reduction policies, not harm exacerbation policies.

Please call your U.S. representative toll-free by using the Capitol Switchboard at 800-839-5276. This switchboard operates 24 hours a day. So if you are inspired to call after normal business hours, the operator will transfer you to your U.S. representative's office and you can leave a voice mail message. Of course, calling during business hours is preferable.

Here is a sample script for you to use when you call:

"Hello, my name is ______________ and I live in ______________. I am calling to urge Representative __________________ not to cosponsor the Drug Sentencing Reform Act being introduced by Representative Souder [rhymes with powder]. This bill would dramatically increase penalties on individuals growing medical marijuana in accordance with state law. It would also ensure that smoking marijuana is even more harmful to children than it is under current law. This is not a bill that Representative ________ should support."

If you are not certain who your U.S. representative is, go to http://www.house.gov/writerep , enter your state and zip code (your five-digit zip should work), and click the "Contact My Representative" button. The name of your U.S. representative should appear on the next page.

As noted above, this bill is also designed to limit the ability of federal judges to reduce prison sentences for defendants convicted of drug-related offenses. For example, under the provisions of this bill, a judge would be prohibited from reducing a defendant's sentence based on family or community ties -- factors that could still be considered in non-drug-related cases.

The Marijuana Policy Project will be working with many other individuals and organizations to fight this bill. It will not be passed without a major fight. Thank you for doing your part to stop it.

======================================================================

Please visit http://www.mpp.org/USA/donate.html or write to MPP, P.O. Box 77492, Washington, D.C. 20013 to donate to our lobbying work on Capitol Hill."

[CWOJackson]

"The truth always wins..."

It sure does...which is why the message you people are putting out dies so quickly.

[pageonetoo]

This is a forum of OPINION. And, like ...holes, everyone has them.
I, personally, am tired of listening to your juvenile BS, so please honor your commitment to go away! You add nothing to the thread, but caustic dissention, without relevant discussion. To put it in other words, my 14 year old daughter can make a better, more cogent argument, on most any subject.

I first debated in High School, and continued in college. I was able to persuade folk, with my arguments. Many times, I took the adversarial position, and was just as effective.
Why, because I knew enough about the subject. There are many educated, intelligent folk on this site, and they can make up their minds much better by presenting REASON, rather than obfuscation... and irrelevant pandering to your own biased opinions...

Naturally, there would not be a lot of support for the legalization of Hemp, in this forum. It is composed primarily of older, conservative men. But, that does not mean that intelligent discussion of the ISSUES should not take place.
But, thanks to knee jerk responses, and irrelevant remarks like yours, that discussion is stifled. Whenever a supporter of legalization posts anything positive to their cause, you and your posse' interject yourselves, with no visible, or discernable reason, but to interfere with the discussion.
Please, if you really want to see the truth, just open you eyes, and mind.
Otherwise, please honor your word about leaving, unless you have something of substance to add. I would rather discuss the issues, rather than repeat myself, to you. Of course, I expect little thought, by way of reply, from you, if you remain!
(BTW, please consult your dictionary, if you care to respond, so I don't have to decifer your remarks.)

[Indie]

"...which is why the message you people are putting out dies so quickly.

I haven't heard a coherent argument from you yet. Still, you refuse to answer my question, which is why you are opposed to marijauna legalization. Have you no brain? Can you think for yourself or must you call Dane everytime you post? IMO, I think the depth of your posts are representative of the average 12-16 yr old since you can not, and have not in any of your posts, made any valid statement in support of or against the subject matter. It's real easy to throw out one-liners. You and your pal also make fun of Mr Buckley. That in itself, unsubstantiated by an argument, and without having read the post to which I referred, is totally laughable.

There will be a day when the same JBT you support, will come knocking on your door looking for your gas hogging SUV, your guns and ammo, your non-prescription herbal remedies, your gold and silver, your children for a draft we do not yet need, your DNA, a retina scan, and perhaps your tobacco and alcohol. (Sorry, I forgot teenagers can't have most of that stuff.)

Liberty or Death. Don't Tread on Me you freeking fascist troll.

[Conservative til I die]

The insanity continues. Why not just give marijuana smokers 4,000 years per ounce possessed? Maybe 50,000 years per. That oughta stop the tide of drug use.

Hell, why not just shoot everyone at birth, that way we wouldn't have drug abuse at all. Like Uncle Joe Stalin, people are the problem. No people, no problem, eh?

But I'm sure the drug warriors are sexually aroused like you wouldn't believe right now.

[Conservative til I die]

He's a lost cause, Eno. This man is a worshipper of government.

[Conservative til I die]

But honestly, what's so wrong with "synthesizing?" That's a weird cut-off point. I mean, hell, almost everything we consume is synthesized in some way: natural parts processed and combined to make something new. That's all that cocaine (from the coca plant) and heroin (opiate made from poppies) are.

[Conservative til I die]

So why are conservatism and drug legalization inconsistent? They are not. Your sarcasm proves nothing. Why are you reading this thread if you are anti-marijuana?

Because he's a troll with a raging hard-on for drug users and drug legalization threads. You'd think for someone crowing over the non-interest at FR of this thread, he wouldn't be the one making 60% of the posts thus far.

[Conservative til I die]

There are plenty of totalitarian conservatives. Plenty.

[Conservative til I die]

Heck, if it wasn't for me this thread would have died hours ago.

Who're you kidding, whitey? From your history here, I know that you're just begging for others to come on this thread so you can start your usual insult-fest. That's why every other post is from you and that's why you simply won't stop posting on the thread.

Surprised you haven't busted out the Ping list yet.

[Conservative til I die]

Thought you'd appreciate checking out this tantrum.

Strike what I said in the last post about being surprised you hadn't started pinging people to the thread. Face it bro, you're itching for this thread to turn into an all out war. You live for the strife and ill-feelings.

[Conservative til I die]

As for Buckley, you are talking way out of their league...He THINKS.

Yet CWO made some offhand comment about him being mummified.

It's hilarious how the drug warriors continually make the pool of people they smear larger and larger in an attempt to justify their wrongheaded views on the drug war. I can imagine if President Bush or Rush Limbaugh decided that the WOD was wrong, CWO and Dane would be here talking about "that ex-drunk Bush" and "that pillhead fatso Limbaugh."

Not to use a liberal cliche, but these guys remind me of the Salem witch trials.

[Conservative til I die]

It's because CWO is insecure in his beliefs. He needs someone to tag-team with to make it seem like he's superior to us. Pretty soon will come the mutual-admiration, back-slapping exchanges, where Dane and CWO act like this is their own private thread that no one else is reading, where they say things like "Good one, Dane!" and "We're so much better than these junkies."

It's pretty gay, actually.

[Conservative til I die]

Yeah, that was pretty hilarious how he high-tailed it out of here as soon as he was challenged.

That was just like the moron on some smoking-ban thread who said that the government can ban anything they want in bars in order to "promote the general welfare" of the people.

He was immediately challeneged by all types of people for thinking like a liberal would, and he immediately disappeared from the thread.

[Conservative til I die]

Why do you want it to remain illegal?

[Indie]

Sheesh Conservative Till I Die...like a HURRICANE of fresh air in here!! LOL!

"People like William F. Buckley, George Shultz, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, and Walter Williams. These are people who understand Public Choice theory, they understand what the great Nobel laureate F.A. Hayek called the fatal conceit -- the mistaken notion that government can effectively engineer social arrangements -- they understand the power of the forces of supply and demand, they understand the unintended consequences that invariably accompany federal intervention, and, not least, they understand the need to take the Constitution seriously.
In the name of the War on Drugs, due process is thrown to the wind and private property confiscated under so-called forfeiture laws that make a mockery of the very concept of private property. In the name of the War on Drugs financial privacy and internet privacy are under constant assault. In the name of the War on Drugs Latin American nations become pawns of U.S. domestic policy. In the name of the War on Drugs police forces throughout the nation become corrupt, and in the name of the War on Drugs some of the best and the brightest of our inner-city young people get drawn into a criminal subculture that affects their attitudes on not just drugs, but education, the family, civility itself.
Hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on the War on Drugs and yet, drugs are available everywhere. Across the street from the White House. Across the street from the Cato Institute. Even in prisons. Interdiction is a joke. If they can't keep drugs out of the prisons, how in the world do they propose doing so in civil society, short of creating a police state?

Original URL: CATO

[Conservative til I die]

You're a sad person. Is that all you have, nuking the debate by insulting your opponents? I won't fall for the bait and plead with you to believe that I'm not a drug user. But really, why are you so afraid of debate?

[farmfriend]

According to the documentary I watched once, marijuana was made illegal to control the black male. Don't remember exactly how the theroy went. Like all laws made by congress, the only way they could do it was to use the interstate commerce clause. They required it to have a tax stamp but then would not issue the stamp. They have since changed this and made it illegal another way. I don't remember how. I am for legalization myself.

[Conservative til I die]

Speaking of synthetics and naturals, isn't there actually something called synthetic heroin? Very dangerous stuff from what I've heard.

[FLCowboy,]

Well, good. At least they can do something that doesn't pi** off the Democrats

[Conservative til I die]

Well, the reason marijuana and the other drugs are illegal is because of politics. But aside from that, I don't think natural vs. synthetic should be the hinge that the argument turns on. It's as irrelevant as saying powder drugs should be more legal than liquid ones.