I agree to Idea Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act
Voting Disabled

1183 votes

I disagree to Idea Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act

Rank1

Idea#594

This idea is active.
Legal & Policy Challenges »

Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act

Dear Mr. President,

Please direct the DEA to remove marijuana from Schedule I and correctly classify it under the definitions that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) provides. You said in your press conference (after you released the ban on federal funds for stem-cell research) that you believed that science should dictate policy not politics and I respectfully request that you follow through with this pledge even on something so politically toxic as marijuana.

Schedule I of the CSA specifically states that in order to be placed in this schedule I that the substance in question must have "no accepted medical use for treatment in the United States." Well... as of 1996 there are states that have accepted the medicinal uses of marijuana for treatment. Currently there are 13 states that have ACCEPTED the medical use for treatment therefore the current scheduling goes against the definition that was put into place.

In 1970, when the CSA was established there were NO accepted uses for treatment in the US, so the initial scheduling was correct. In 1988, when Administrative Law Judge Francis Young ruled that the DEA was required to reclassify marijuana there again were no states that had accepted the use for treatment and therefore the DEA had due cause to ignore the recommendation. But after California ACCEPTED the medical use for treatment in 1996 the Scheduel I classification became incorrect soley based on the definition.

Why does the Federal Government currently provide Medical Marijuana to 4 citizens of the United States for treatment of their illnesses while upholding the classification under "no medical use for treatment"? Isn't this a little hypocritical???

Submitted by 5 years ago

Comments (88)

  1. Go to L.E.A.P

    It is inconceivable to me that in America especially ,that any thing other than crime could be against the law ! We have become a nation of numbered idiots .

    Think about it , if you still can.

    Life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness...

    I don't need anyone's permission to be free thank you.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  2. People are not responsible with drinking or smoking, I don’t think we can with Marijuana.

    I knew someone who a non-smoker who died from lung cancer and used it as a medically -it was effective to numb the pain but she didn't like the high you get and stopped using it.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  3. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    Josh...

    So your friend used it and it was effective to numb her pain...

    I'm not here trying to debate whether this should be allowed for recreational use, but whether the Federal Government has marijuana in accurately classified. Should it be pulled off the CSA altogether... NO I think that it should end up as a Schedule III or IV drug. The point is that it no longer meets the defination that was put in place for Schedule I back in 1970.

    Your friend's experience should prove to you that there are medical uses for the drug and that for some people it provides better results than prescription drugs. ASk yourself this question:

    Should the Federal Government determine what is acceptable treatment for your illness or should that decision be made by you and your doctor?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  4. Criminalization of marijuana overcrowds the jails and justice system. Meanwhile we won't "look back", forward, or any other direction, at the real criminals in America, the banks, bankers, and war profiteers who infest government to make sure they get theirs while the American people suffer through this despression.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  5. Yes, grab hold of that third rail...

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  6. mtimmins,

    rereading: I do agree its wrongly classified. I think the Government started to determine what is acceptable treatment when we created what was a doctors note (list) into a required prescription. I don't know if thats right or wrong just stating it.

    My friend didn't use it in any legal means and what did she care, she wasn't long for this world. I would say she shouldn't have had to sneak around to find something to ease here suffering if she wanted to continue to use it.

    On the flip side we don't need people jumping to use it because of hay-fever either. We are already a pill popping culture for every problem we think we have...

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  7. But, To get out of smoking herb is MUCH MUCH better then to jump away from pills or booze.

    Bongs before bullets any day for me.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  8. Josh : First of all, I'm sorry about your friend. I realize this article isn't about fully legalizing mj, but in this comment here.. "On the flip side we don't need people jumping to use it because of hay-fever either. We are already a pill popping culture for every problem we think we have..." I don't really think anyone will be "jumping to use it." It's already so readily available now that basically anyone that wants to use it already does..regardless of their age. On the other point in that comment..I agree..I feel that our doctors do over medicate us. Case in point.. I have a 6 month old son that has been diagnosed with acid reflux syndrome..not a huge deal by any stretch, but this diagnosis came from being in the office for 5 mins and saying "he cries all the time." 5 years ago no one had heard of this disorder..now it seems everyone and their mother has it.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  9. malikai0976,

    thank you.

    I't seems we all have a disorder to med now, I hope you kid just out grows it... true people may not jump to try but we know kids jump to try when the drinking age comes around.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  10. No one can try to defend cannabis being a schedule I substance without looking like a shmuck. The Obama administration (and in turn, the media) has to have their feet held to the fire and made to explain why they think cannabis has no medical value and is highly addictive.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  11. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    FOR THOSE THAT ARE VOTING THIS DOWN:

    Are you saying that our Government is correctly enforcing the definition that they created? Or do you really just think that marijuana is so dangerous that doctors shouldn't be allowed to recommend it?

    Your ideas on Marijuana should be put to the side as this in no way is recommending the legalization for recreational use. This is strictly about following the definition of the Schedules in the Controlled Substances Act. IF there are 13 states that have officially ACCEPTED the medical use AND the US Government supplies citizens with MEDICAL MARIJUANA for treatment then how is it that marijuana is still classified under the definition that there are NO ACCEPTED medical uses for treatment in the United States????

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  12. In most countries in Europe and may countries around the world, recreational use of marijuana is legal and in California and 12 other states it is now legal to use if you have a medical condition. I hope one day they de-criminalize the recreational use of marijuana in the usa. Mankind has smoked marijuana since the begginning of time even before we began to consume alcohol.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  13. Having cannabis in schedule 1 is probably the most ludicrous mistake of this drug war. CLEARLY it does not deserve to be there, and I think anyone, even the anti-marijuana folks, should support it's re-classification.

    This is the LEAST the Obama Administration could do, after all the false promises he made before election.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  14. Bud Goodman Yes, it should have never been classified as schedule 1 in the first place.Cannabis,[Hemp] is a plant it is not a drug,it comes from a seed. It was used for medcinal purposes long before it was made illegal in early American history. I don't think it should regulated by the medical industies either. There's to much beuacracy involed with who's sick enough or who gets to grow it and how much you can grow and how many people you can grow for. Oh then there's Fee's and permits,to much B. S. Rescheduel it and then LEGALIZE IT regulate and tax it like acohol. Put the FARMERS back to work with a decent cash crop. Create thousands of new jobs in bio-fuel hard plastics that are biodegradible virtually indestuctable car bodyparts the lists just go on and on. Don't put the distabution into Tobaco Industries hands let some small businesses get rich for change we can believe in. It should be for responsible adult use for everyone that chooses,not just for the sick and dying. Freedom of choice, stand up America get active let your voice be heard.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  15. nippon_nights,

    -Having cannabis in schedule 1 is probably the most ludicrous mistake of this drug war.

    Well I have to say that is not so at all, considering lives have been lost. I don’t remember all the details but the US at times did supply deforestation chemicals to South America in efforts of destroying crops –at the same time the open spraying was used on the people living next to the crops and farms. Resulting in the slow death and or sickness of children and adults.

    With this loosely stated fact but true by my recollection, plus many other acts of good and bad that have cost us all dearly in family, money, and lives.

    I would say the fight for changing this is mostly a selfish one, if so much energy was focused on a topic that had a larger benefit to country and us all I wonder what the results would be.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  16. alcohol and cigarettes do much worse damage.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  17. -Josh Senecal

    True... But a lot of bad things have happened as a result of wrongly classifying it as they did.

    It could be blamed for how furious they go after and attack where it grows... It could be blamed for how vicious police are, when catching a pothead/grower. They assume it's a horrible deadly drug, just because it's in schedule 1.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  18. I get why it's wrongly classified and agree it is not the same as the others.

    Even if its changed to a lesser offense its still unlawful to have and will still carry a penalty for traffickers and users...

    what do you feel will happen if its reclassified? Cops pat the user on the head and hand out a tickets then sending them home?

    Is this the first step to try and legalize it?

    Why not go for something killing people like cigarettes and have that first added to schedule 1? It's more addictive from what I'm reading, even as hard to kick as cocaine?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  19. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    Josh...

    My concern has never been for the full out legalization... My concern is for the rule of law...if our law makers found it necessary to design a set of laws to protect us then that law is one that should guide us. If the majority of the population believes otherwise they can do what they can to change that law. This request has NOTHING to do with changing laws, but to enforce them as they are written. Even REPUBLICANS have to agree with this as one of their major tennents is the strict interpretation of the constitution. If you say that Schedule I is for those substances with NO medical value then fine... but when a substance is ACCEPTED for use in treatment (by 13 states... and frankly even by the Federal Government that provides Medical Marijuana to 4 US citizens each month) then you have to reclassify it based on the definition.

    This is not the "first step".... this is rationale policy making... whatever your ideas on recreational use separate them from those that could benefit that have dibilitating diseases and chronic pain...

    MEDICAL DECISIONS AND TREATMENTS SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR NOT UNCLE SAM!!!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  20. If this is strictly for reclassification based on the definition, then it appears the government slowly let its guard down and you have a window for your case...good luck.

    However, as good as the government is at having hidden agendas, I would caution even if your personal beliefs don't -most organizations do.

    If you had it reclassified, would it be over? for this topic?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  21. Are you people even reading this before you decide yes or no....

    Is there ACCEPTED medical use in the United States or not?

    SIMPLE QUESTION

    The answer should dictate the placement in the Controlled Substances Act. Congress being unwilling to make the change due to political reasons (too many political futures to think about) leaves either direct order by the Supreme Court (Long legal battle) or by directive from the President.

    SCIENCE OVER POLITICS MR. PRESIDENT???

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  22. Actually if you count Washington D.C. as, not a state, but count it as approved for medical marijuana then the count is 14. It passed in D.C., but the politicians have overrided the vote of the people, and won't allow it to take effect. What a bunch of power grubbing assholes.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  23. Josh If we could have it reclassified, I think it would help with the decrimanalization of cannabis for alot of states. Maybe then we can move towards legalization with open fact based debates. Stop arresting citizens for something that is safer than tylenol or drinking alcohol. It could also help bring thousand of jobs to our economy. For me it is about freedom of choice. Government shouldn't be telling you what you can and cannot put into your body. I was in a severe motorcycle accident twenty years ago and when my insurance ran out six months later, and the doctors refused to continue treatment. I did use then for my pain relief and it did work. I don't drink alcohol and can't stand drinking, but I do like to wind down and relax after a hard days work, and cannabis does that for me. But since it is illegal I choose to abstain. Because I'm a law abiding citizen. Plus, I am also trying to find a job and most of the corperations in the US test for THC because of cannabis's classification as a schedule 1 narcotic. Just a plant, should be in everyone's garden right beside the tomatoes. The world be a much more peaceful place.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  24. No Josh.

    It would not be over for this issue. And here's why.

    Josh if you really think you or this government should have the right to tell me what I can and can not do in my own house you are wrong. If I want to sit at my house and shoot up Drano that is none of your business. As long as I don't get in my car and drive around or endanger you or anyone else in any way. If I do that's when I should go to jail. It's called freedom Josh. America use to know what that was. We never had drug laws in this country until 1937. Before that your could order marijuana, cocaine, and a plethora of opiates from Sears & Roebucks. It's just wrong. Here's a quote from someone who agrees.

    "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."

    Abraham Lincoln.

    I'm not saying that drugs are a good thing. It's been said before "drugs are bad the drug war is worse". Is smoking marijuana bad for you? Maybe, so are Big-Macs and Whoppers heart disease is the leading cause of death in America. Hey, lets lockup Ronald McDonald... No that would be dumb lets just go with the twenty million Americans we've already locked up for using a substance "pot" that has never been known to kill anyone.(1)

    Josh do you have kids? Do you want them to smoke pot? If you answered yes. Then I understand why you support the unregulated sale of marijuana. When I was twelve half the kids in my school smoked pot. They rolled it in Cinnaburst gum wrappers. Why? Because they didn't know anyone old enough to buy them rolling papers and, that was the closest thing they could buy. My point is, had the sale of marijuana been regulated like alcohol is. I don't think there would have been hundreds of kids in my school smoking it in the gym, behind the gym, under the bleachers, etc. etc. etc.

    America's War on Drugs has done nothing to stem the use of drugs. It has only given the control of a multi billion dollar industry to the worse people imaginable. The Mexican drug cartels killed 6,300 people last year.(2) That's more than all the U.S. casualty's in Iraq. The War on Drugs has been an utter failure and a dark chapter in Americas history. Prohibition didn't work before it doesn't work now.

    Believe me Josh this is not the end of this issue.

    (1)National Academy Press, 1999) US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 57.

    (2)"Mexican drug cartels are loading up on bullets in the U.S." By Todd Bensman - Special to GlobalPost

    Published: March 4, 2009.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  25. Legalization of it is probably not as feasible as simply tolerating it. People falsely believe that the Netherlands has legalized marijuana, when in reality, there isn't a single law on the books about its legalization. The truth is, it has the same "substance abuse" status that is generally acknowledged by the Western world, but they simply don't punish when it's used in moderation. You're actually allowed to grow no more than 5 plants in your home. And the "coffee shops" that sell hash/marijuana are now limited in their ability to expand. Only existing shops are allowed to continue their licenses, no new ones are being issued.

    If you want to stop the ridiculous US policy toward marijuana, you must stop saying it should be legalized and focus on the waste of energy, money, time and resources for arresting the average smoker. That would probably improve the chance of gaining wider support, and you won't be seen as just a pot-head.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  26. IIRC, reclassifying cannabis out of Schedule I means the "Drug Czar" would no longer be required by law to refrain from any statement or action supporting legalization regardless of evidence, correct?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  27. Marijuana's inclusion in Schedule I was at first considered temporary, pending an expected report from President Richard Nixon's National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse (a.k.a. the Shafer Commission -named for Raymond P. Shafer, a former Republican governor from Pennsylvania, who served as chairman). However, the Commission's 1972 report, "Marijuana: a Signal of Misunderstanding," acknowledged marijuana's safety relative to other drugs and recommended decriminalization.

    Looking objectively at the CSA, belongs no higher than Schedule III and in a perfect world would be excluded all together on the basis that alcohol, tobacco and caffeine are all excluded. All 3 of those kill people every year yet marijuana is classified as the worst of the worst while never causing a single death in thousands of years.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  28. And NIXON wanted it controlled because it was the "EVIL WEED". It was what the hippies and the protesters were on. The same people that were fighting against him politically. The SAME Richard Nixon that would do ANYTHING to hold on to his power and who wanted to silence those that had opposing views. The SAME Richard Nixon that sent in "the plumbers" to spy on the DNC. The SAME Richard Nixon that had to RESIGN in shame...

    It's a wonder why we still follow ANY laws that were spearheaded by the NIXON Administration. Does anyone else think that especially HIS adminstration should be looked at with a fine tooth comb... questioned... and evaluated? The Shafer Commission was clear with their recommendation.... Administrative Law Judge Francis Young was clear as well.... BUT INSTEAD WE CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THE WISDOM AND GUIDANCE OF RICHARD NIXON????

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  29. Vice is not crime.

    No crime, no punishment.

    So simple.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  30. Dear Mr President,

    If the idea of legalization, or even the availability of medical marijuana is to be based on a state by state basis, then it is the federal government's responsibility to get out of the way of state's right to make their own decision regarding legalization or allowing availability of medical marijuana to their sick and dying citizens. As it stands, so long as drug policy remains at its current point, state legislators will have the right to fall back on an old, tired argument that "federal law supercedes state law", which will then put the decision in the hands of the federal government, or Supreme court. The Supreme Court has already handed down a decision that defends the california medical marijuana law, and I suspect the court will continue to make similar rulings in the future if this case is brought back up to the supreme court. Would it not be more expedient to simply change the law, via congress, and your full throated support? Why must we continually go through the same process time after time, wasting millions or billions of dollars, if we know the eventual outcome?

    Please, Mr President. You once said something to the effect of "if you want me to do something, make me do it". Please consider this note my request to make you do it, and begin the process to change the current drug policy laws to lead the charge for states to make their own policies.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  31. It is going to take persistent pressure from the people along with patience for it to become a real change since are system has been built around it being illegal. Long as we keep pushing for the law to get changed at the Federal level then we have a chance of ending the horrors of WAR.

    "We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate."

    .....Thomas Jefferson

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  32. “U.S. Customs agents got a surprise on April 9, when they checked a trailer of an 18-wheel truck crossing into El Paso, Texas, from Mexico and found more than 9,000 pounds of marijuana hidden among auto parts bound for U.S. factories.”

    Reason why I posted this is this simply points the fact I and many other Americans know about if marijuana was legalized and taxed that these types of problems with the cartel would no longer be a problem being the legalization and taxation would strike a saver blow to the cartel taking away their over 60% annual profit from keeping marijuana illegal which if legalized and taxed would be like cutting off the legs of a chicken to the cartel. Also the fact that Mexican cartels import a huge amount of opium for heroin from Afghanistan. Without the monetary flow from the sale of cannabis they would not be able to produce heroin and this would in affect shut down the Taliban because a large amount of funding for the Taliban is opium.” But hey what do we know after all will the govt listen to us? May be now they will and start to work with us “THE PEOPLE OF THE USA” put an end to the cartels reign by legalize and tax marijuana now be for the cartel does even more damage to our nation…..

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  33. Legalize and decriminalize!

    Allowing the Government to control growth and distribution of Marijuana will do numerous things to help our culture and economy.

    1) Marijuana has never been known to be a problem drug for users and people near them.

    A) Marijuana users are not prone to using violence to solve disputes with other users or non-users.

    B) Marijuana users are not aggressive drivers, and are usually very cautious, unlike alcohol users.

    C) Marijuana users are seldom involved in

    criminal activities while using the drug.

    2) Government distribution of Marijuana is good for the economy.

    A) Taxes on marijuana use will contribute tens of millions of dollars in taxes, maybe more.

    B) Tax dollars will no longer be needed to fight the illicit marijuana drug trade.

    C) The American Court system will be relieved of a great financial and case load burden through legalization.

    D) American law enforcement will be able to use their funds and resources to address more serious issues of crime.

    3) Improvement in health issues.

    A) Users of marijuana for health issues will have a reduction in costs for the product, allowing them to use their resources for other aspects of health recovery.

    B) Consistency of the strength of marijuana products will be greatly improved, thus allowing health users a more predictable result.

    C) Elimination of stress for "illicit" users of marijuana for medical purposes. Users will no longer fear being jailed for using marijuana to settle their stomach after chemo, or increase their appetite when disease has taken it away.

    4) Marijuana by-products will be more available and scientific discoveries more frequent.

    A) Fiber for paper and textiles can be provided by the farms that grow marijuana.

    B) Oils from the rendering of plant fibers can be used for a myriad purposes including fuel, cooking and cosmetics.

    C) Derivatives may include control of glaucoma, a serious eye problem that causes blindness.

    As a non-user of marijuana, I see many more benefits than problems that will come about when the government takes control of this product. When marijuana and other drugs are controlled by government, fewer crimes will be committed in order to acquire the substances. Our society will be a much better place because of it. Government as an Ideal, should foster the personal and collective growth of it's members, not seek to punish them for their every transgression.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  34. It's a start.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  35. Please note that this topic has nothing to do with legalization/decriminalization. The hypocrisy that exists in the scheduling of marijuana is embarrassing. How can a drug be placed in the "Schedule One" category, meaning it has no accepted medical value, high abuse, and low safety, when medicinal marijuana is accepted and practiced in 13 states, let alone all the credible medical institutes that support its use? Does the DEA consider themselves more qualified as physicians than the American Medical Association, for example? No one has ever died of an overdose. It is not nearly as addicting as legal drugs such as OxyContin, if marijuana is addicting at all.

    At the same time, Marinol, which is 100 percent THC, is a Schedule Three drug. How can the most potent version of a schedule One drug be considered schedule three? It makes absolutely no sense. Marijuana needs to be removed from the schedule one category, not only to allow patients who need it to have it available to them, but also to end the government monopoly on medical marijuana research.

    End the hypocrisy in our government.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  36. pbrigando13

    I placed my comment in every marijuana dialogue to provide various reasons to legalize it. Yes, this is for the removal of marijuana from Sched. One category, but it is really much more than that. It's about special interests restricting or controlling this substance, and until there are enough financial considerations to outweigh the interests of Big Pharma and others, the deed will never be done. Thus my post. Years ago my (dec'd) wife used marinol to counter effects of chemo and it was very helpful for the short time she used it.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  37. see also: Legalize Marijuana And Solve Many Tax Issues / Prison Issues

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  38. Imprison Drug users for life?

    http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/4682-4049

    "It's hard to get a man to understand something,when his salary depends on his not understanding.

    ~ Upton Sinclair

    If you examine the lies and manipulation involved in committing the crime of the Substance Abuse Act. There will be no need to "legalize" cannabis. It won't be worthy of outlawing and Hemp is literally ludicrous as a schedule#1 narcotic. Clearly the competition puts out a lot of money toward over zealous drug worriers campaigns. Remove the lies and then treat the street Pharmaceuticals like any deficiency.

    The prohibition itself causes the harm in drugs. Same drugs given safely to millions without sharing needles, adulterations or inconsistent dosages. Vices are not crimes and lies are. Lets have some Justice. btw No self respecting grower will ruin their crop pollinating it with hemp as a camouflage.

    Ganja has been used safely for 5000 years, Illicit pharmaceuticals were invented around 1850. No one can Gateway to what hasn't been invented. Only prohibition provides the stepping stone.

    Pot potency has always been a range of THC levels, strains and climates. Extractions, elixirs and synthetic isolations of cannabinoids were in common use. Hash oil and Panama Red, Acapulco Gold, Thai stick or Vietnamese in the 60's and early 70's were higher potency than todays kynd bud.

    All the drug czar's propaganda did was raise the price of BC bud, like free advertising. Buyers clubs have shown how to do it. Or home growing as a cost savings for Pharmaceuticals a less intoxicating substance than alcohol. continued...

    http://drugwarrant.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4379#4379

    "Even if one takes every reefer madness allegation of the prohibitionists at face value, marijuana prohibition has done far more harm to far more people than marijuana ever could."

    William F. Buckley, Jr. - Writer

    "Marihuana influences Negroes to to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."

    William Randolph Hearst - Newspaper Tycoon (1936)

    "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

    Harry J. Anslinger - America's 1st Drug Czar (FDR - JFK)

    In a republic like ours, people often think that the proper response to an unjust law is to try to use the political process to change the law, but to obey and respect the law until it is changed. But if the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws, then the law deserves no respect — break the law. - Henry David Thoreau

    "Narcotics police are an enormous, corrupt international bureaucracy ... and now fund a coterie of researchers who provide them with 'scientific support' ... fanatics who distort the legitimate research of others. ... The anti-marijuana campaign is a cancerous tissue of lies, undermining law enforcement, aggravating the drug problem, depriving the sick of needed help, and suckering well-intentioned conservatives and countless frightened parents."

    William F. Buckley, Jr. RIP

    http://tinyurl.com/WilliamFBuckley-Jr-RIP"

    Commentary in The National Review, April 29, 1983, p. 495

    DWR: Wednesday, February 27, 2008

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  39. You need to learn how to read.

    NO I would not like to have Biden as Pres. and Pelosi as VP. They both scare the daylights out of me.

    And I do know about the eligibility of our founding fathers.

    Just FYI, you can read the writings of the signers of the Constitution by going to wallbuilders.com, this website is a wealth of information.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  40. I believe the only way we can expect reform of these laws is to take away the profit motive of keeping marijuana illegal. The asset forfeiture laws have made small time busts extremely lucrative for police and DEA agencies.

    Click here to read more.

    Federal and State Asset Forfeiture Laws Need Reform

    http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/4321-4049

    As long as billions of dollars flow into the coffers of Federal and State asset seizure, there is more than enough incentive not to endorse change to existing laws. The old adage "hit em in the pocket book" is especially applicable when discussing this issue.

    Now, to be fair, I must say I do not endorse the use of harsh drugs like cocaine. I have seen too many lives ruined from abuse. This said, our government needs to take a different approach to helping people who have become addicted to these substances. Incarceration has not worked. If asset seizure cannot be completely abolished, the preferred goal, then I would like to see ALL seizure assets flow into federally funded treatment for cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin addicts and the like. None of this money should go to more seizures or be allowed to pay department salaries. This only encourages abuse of power.

    I do not include marijuana in this list because I see it as basically a "soft" drug. As such I don't think it should be included in the schedule 1 classification and should instead be listed as "having medical benefit" and listed in schedule 5.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  41. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    THIS IS NOT AN IDEA TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA ---- THIS IS A SIMPLE CALL TO CLASSIFY MARIJUANA UNDER THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT BASED ON THE DEFINITIONS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED IN 1970..... PLEASE READ THE IDEA BEFORE VOTING UP OR DOWN!!!

    THE SIMPLE QUESTION: ARE THERE MEDICAL USES FOR TREATMENT IN THE US OR NOT?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  42. IF YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT WHO READ THE IDEA BEFORE VOTING UP OR DOWN, CHECK OUT "h2odok 2 hours ago". HE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THREAD HE'S ON.

    "You need to learn how to read.

    NO I would not like to have Biden as Pres. and Pelosi as VP. They both scare the daylights out of me.

    And I do know about the eligibility of our founding fathers.

    Just FYI, you can read the writings of the signers of the Constitution by going to wallbuilders.com, this website is a wealth of information."

    AT LEAST MOST OF US KNOW WHERE WE ARE. ;D SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT WHO READ THE IDEA BEFORE VOTING UP OR DOWN, YOU'RE #5 ON THE HIT PARADE. WE KNOW THAT YOUR POST IS ABOUT MEDICAL MARIJUANA AND WE AGREE WITH YOU. IT'S JUST THAT FOR MOST OF US IT'S ONE PART OF A LARGER ISSUE INVOLVING OUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS WHO GET THROWN INTO CAGES WITH MURDERERS AND RAPISTS FOR NOTHING.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  43. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    felkakarp:

    I will say that I am in agreement that prohibition has caused more issues than it has solved (well... has it solved anything???) Marijuana has caused ZERO deaths in 5000 years and I would think that the Government would want to keep us away from harmful things.

    It just frustrates me to see anyone vote this down as it should have nothing to do with your views on Marijuana. The government gives it to 4 US Citzens for medical use and 13 states have accepted the use for treatment. It is clear that the scheduling is incorrect.

    MR PRESIDENT:

    As our country's first black president the hysteria that was disseminated by the Federal Government dating back to the Marihuana Tax Stamp Act of 1937 should appaul you.

    "Marihuana influences Negroes to to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."

    William Randolph Hearst - Newspaper Tycoon (1936)

    "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

    Harry J. Anslinger - America's 1st Drug Czar (FDR - JFK)

    IF this is what our laws were formed around, don't you think its good time to relook at these failed policies? Have we not come into the 21st Century?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  44. THE SIMPLE QUESTION: ARE THERE MEDICAL USES FOR TREATMENT IN THE US OR NOT?

    Simpleton question since the entire frickin scheduling was a fabrication of lying MF Nixon. Your point is moot. Of coarse there is ample verification for Rx Ganja throughout history. Re-Scheduling something into the same fraud only shows the lack of education about the Ganjawar and Hemp. By agenda not always stupidity. Programmed Education Depravation. Do to censorship, programmed media and an over zealous drug czar/education secretary Bennett. No reality based reasons. So remove the plant from this flim flam. The racism and greed base of prohibition on some plants, plus the fascist censorship, banning research, mandatory sentencing, 3 strikes, 404 gag rules, confiscations before guilt, forfeitures and torturing sick people is way more than enough to show Un-American activities and these politikops should be black listed and caged for their involvement that is so obvious except to those profitting on perpetuating the war on some citizens and certain plants. It stays!

    Granny Storm Crow's MMJ List

    http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=95659

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  45. Source: US Department of Justice "In the matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" {Docket#86-22}{September 6, 1988} p.57, The DEA Administrative Law Judge Francsis Young concluded. "In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume.For example,eating 10 raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison it is physically impossable to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in it's natural form is one the safest theraputically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely usedwithin the supervised routine of medical care." O K that was 1988, What year is it now? Mr. President come on do the right thing. You said you were going to end the wars. No sign of that happening yet. Ending this one would be a very good start.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  46. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    To Whom It May Concern:

    I just got a chance to read the report that was released concerning the site analysis for the “Open Government Brainstorm”. Being that today has been the scheduled day for Phase II to begin I have been interested in seeing which ideas would be pushed forward and discussed in more detail. I am the author of the idea: “Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act” which as of now has garnered 578 votes (703 positive and 125 negative votes). In your report you mention that fact that like “other civic engagement efforts by the White House, the Brainstorm saw many comments from those in favor of legalizing Marijuana and/or “ending the war on drugs”. Then the report goes on to say “Other comments that may be loosely categorized as “legal and policy”, but were clearly off-topic as it relates to this Brainstorm,”. The report makes it sound like marijuana issues are “clearly off-topic”.

    I am taking the time to write this letter as I 100% disagree that the issue I brought forward is “clearly off-topic”. The only way for you to make this determination is if you had not actually read the idea and just assumed that you knew what it said. The fact of the matter is that the President’s Memorandum clearly makes this to be an issue worth discussing further (not to mention that it gained one of the most votes on the site):

    “I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive.”

    On Transparency:

    My idea is to instruct the DEA (an executive agency) to remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act as it no longer meets the definition that was established in 1970. President Obama also stated in his memo that his “Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use.” He goes on to say that “Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.” For the hundreds of thousands of patients that could benefit from Medical Marijuana (that they are currently barred from because of the classification) think that this is information that is of great use to them.

    On Participation:

    In his memo, the President states that “Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.” This idea calls on the President to take the information and expertise of the 13 States that have already accepted the use for treatment and recognize that the current scheduling is contrary to the law as it is written. These 13 States (as well as many others that have tried and failed to pass sensible medical marijuana laws) have participated in the National Discussion dating back to 1996 when Prop 215 passed in California. I ask the President to draw on the expertise of Judge Francis Young that ruled in 1988 that the DEA should re-schedule Marijuana. Our efforts to participate in the legal system were successful in relation to the recommendation that was given to the DEA, however we were not successful in having the DEA listen to that recommendation. We are simply asking the President to put science over politics and to enforce the law that was written by taking Marijuana out of Schedule I.

    On Collaboration:

    This actually gets to the root of the issue at hand. The President said, “Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.” I submit to you today that the DEA did not collaborate with Administrative Law Judge Francis Young in 1988 when the recommendation to re-schedule was made. The DEA simply choose to ignore that recommendation without providing any information to the contrary. I can also say that the DEA has also not collaborated with the Congress to either change the law as it is written or to re-schedule based on the definition that Congress came up with.

    I humbly submit to you that my idea is in fact “clearly on-topic” and due to the high support for the issue should be moved into Phase II for further discussion. As it stands today this is the #2 issue on the web site and to ignore the views of those you asked for ideas from is astounding. I hope that this clearly identifies why this is a topic that should be discussed further. I look forward to your thoughtful response and consideration of this issue.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  47. I personally think that recreational marijuana use is unwise, along with a plethora of other habits and practices. However, I do not think that it's the right of the federal government to protect us from ourselves, and would like to see them get out of the business of legislating against issues of a moral nature altogether, leaving that to the states.

    Even by the letter of existing law, marijuana is NOT legitimately a Schedule I substance. For me, it's a slam-dunk.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  48. This is a simple matter of paying attention to science and obeying the law as written. The rules for Schedule I are:

    A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

    (B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

    C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

    The best available scientific and medical evidence and opinion clearly shows that criteria B and C do not apply. The only way one can claim A applies is via a circular argument: all cannabis use DEFINED as abuse, therefore it has a high potential for abuse.

    If the rules of classification are objectively and scientifically applied the it would rank no higher than Schedule IV!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  49. The logic of scheduling Cannabis at Schedule IV (or V) is further shown by the DEA itself - by scheduling pure 100% THC at Schedule III.

    Clearly a preparation that is only about 10% as potent should have a lower ranking. One should note that Schedule V consists entirely of drugs with higher rankings (from I down to III) in reduced potency preparations.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  50. The Netherlands is also facing a problem with their prisons, despite the drug strategy there. They are looking at having to reduce their capacity 10-20 percent. Crime is dropping, despite the easy access to drugs. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could replicate that success here?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  51. "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."

    Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President.

    Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  52. yes

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  53. This post is popular but not nearly as popular as the posts asking for Obama to make his birth certificate, college record, health records and the like available.

    Count Birth Certificate comments here and you will get over 7,000 But, this site has been rigged so that the posts asking for Obama to support transparency by providing his own birth certificate, health records and college records are not properly counted, even when they do not get deleted. All of the multiple posts would not need to exist if the honest reporting of this site showed the number one request here is for Obama to release his records.

    I have done a personal count of more than 1,000 requests for his birth certificate. My analysis suggests there have been at least 7,000 request for Obama to produce his real birth certificate, college records, health records and other financial records.

    It is possible to review this site to find the most requested ideas by scanning "Top Rated" posts, but the requests for Obama's records do not show up as being top rated. Those runnig this site are cooking the results. If the results were honest people would be able to continue to vote on a single post asking for transparency of Obama's records.

    According to the liars running this website the most requested item has NOT been Obama's birth certificate.

    (My email is ricardomigrant@aol.com - inlcude your email address if you want me to reply to you)

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  54. Well, "ricardomigrant" since NONE of several dozen nearly identical "topics" about the birth certificate have more than about one-quarter of the votes as this one (maximum is 203 of this writing), and they are clustered together with nearly identical votes, we can conclude that there are only a couple of hundred fanatics (plus their multiple sock-puppets, so the number is likely much smaller than that) interested in this issue.

    At the same time the number who voted on the birth certificate anti-topic (pointing this is a bogus waste of time) is a couple of thousand, ten times the number of apparent BC fanatics.

    I doubt anyone reading here just fell off the turnip truck and is unfamiliar with sock puppets and astro-turfing.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  55. As to:

    Executive branch commanding the legislative branch...

    That is the argument used to disregard the popular demand for ending the war on drugs.

    It is diversionary. Health care is also in the hands of the legislature, the administration has no problem involving itself there.

    So was the bailout. Administration made demand after demand on legislature.

    When it is a policy the administration wants, it is called leadership.

    When it is a policy the administration does not want to touch it is called legislative territory.

    We do not have to accept and be bound by the parameters of that game.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  56. Lets imagine for a second that marijuana is legalized. Lets also disregard the money saved from having people in prisons over this substance. Let us also disregard any social issues you might have with this substance. Let us do some very-dumbed-down math.

    Now, according to the American Lung Association, 45.1 million Americans are smokers. The margin of error here doesn't factor in how many people are social smokers versus regulars versus one timers, etc. Now, not all people who smoke tobacco products are also marijuana smokers, however at the same time I personally know plenty of people who love smoking marijuana, but hate tobacco products. So lets keep the number at 45.1 million for sake of the example.

    So we have some people who smoke a pack (or two, or three) a day, and others who will make a pack last a month. Lets assume for sake of this example that our marijuana cigarette smokers will go for two a day, or three packs a month. One before bedtime, and one when we wake up. I use this example scenario, because most people who I know who are long-term regular smokers who hold regular jobs (some government jobs even), tend to follow this trend.

    So lets put a price on a pack of marijuana cigarettes. Now obviously if marijuana is legalized, the price will drop. But with a pack of cigarettes at 4-7$ (in California), lets drop a price tag on a pack of 20 marijuana cigarettes at 15$. We're not comparing a pack to the price of the amount of marijuana it would take to roll 20 joints. You're paying for the brand here, the box, the foil, the package. You don't have to roll these, they're already done with filters and all. I don't think this scenario would be too far out of alignment considering on average, Americans who do smoke, tend to smoke 13-17 cigarettes per day according to some studies. Thats almost a pack a day average per person who smokes! Our example is talking about a little less than a pack a week!

    So if the Federal government made 100 cents per pack (the US median for taxes on Cigarettes), lets see what that would add up to if an equal number of people were smoking marijuana cigarettes. If 45.1 million Americans are smoking 2 marijuana cigarettes per day, or roughly 60 per month, or roughly 3 packs per month, this amounts to 135.3 million packs smoked per month. Thats roughly 1.62billion dollars a year, using tobacco rates, just from this example.

    Now while these aren't land-slide huge numbers, it would probably be safe to assume that the tax rates would be a lot higher on a substance like this. It is highly likely that a product like this would be far less potent than a marijuana joint that we know and appreciate now (there would likely be heavy regulations on this too).

    In 2007, state governments alone tallied up approximately 15.7 billion dollars worth of revenues from tobacco taxes alone.

    Or we can just leave that money up for grabs by the drug cartels. Its no wonder they're out manning and out gunning our border patrols! What kind of firepower could you buy with 15.7 billion dollars a year (assuming thats ALL you were making)?

    I say we should legalize it, and take the money earned and saved to buy Sarah Palin another new wardrobe collection!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  57. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    BTW - Here is what the President has said about Medical Marijuana....

    "I think the basic concept that using Medical Marijuana in the same way, with the same controls, as other drugs prescribed by doctors... I think that's entirely appropriate."

    SO MR. PRESIDENT....this doesn't take an act of Congress to get done. All you need to do is tell the DEA to appropriately schedule marijuana so that doctors can go ahead and prescribe it!

    52% of Americans suport the outright legalization of Marijuana for recreation use (recent Zogby poll).... so what political capital are you going to use up by simply dealing with Medical Marijuana? I promise you that the statistics are much higher for those that support allowing marijuana to be used with the recommendation of their doctor!!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  58. The US Government's Department of Health and Human Services hold a patent for medical marijuana. It was obtained 10-03, US Patent 6630507 titled “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants”

    Here is the Abstract:

    "Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia."

    What's the hold-up to removing this outdated scheduling?

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  59. Come on people let's just relegalize it, for EVERY use, not just medical, thereby removing it from the controlled substances schedule completely.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  60. Once it is properly removed from Schedule I, the discussion can begin as to where to place it. If that leads the discussion to it not being on the list, so be it...

    FIRST our government needs to be TRANSPARENT with the scientific studies performed here and across the globe with the American public (admit that the old "Reefer Madness" propaganda was BS).

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  61. Perhaps it's time for the majorty of people to rely less on opinions based on long-diseminated propaganda and wilfully ignorant beliefs.

    To this end, I offer the following links to sites with VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE.

    JackHerer dot com - General information

    Hemp = Cannabis = The truth behind the "illegality"

    NORML dot org or NORML dot ca

    ^=- The National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws

    PhoenixTearsMovie dot com - FREE DOWNLOAD DVD

    PhoenixTears dot ca - Cure for cancer = cannabis!

    There are a great many TRUTHFUL and INFORMATIVE sites out there, so the anti-legalization folk have obviously not understood the truth, and I invite them all to view factual information, as opposed to hearsay and propaganda.

    Only when you understand the truth, can you make a truly informed decision...something which our politicians OBVIOULY do not subscribe to.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  62. Yes, only fools think it needs to stay schedule 1. I hope they get cancer and beg me for my stash. Then I can say Fuck you Bitch!!!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  63. Look, This question is stupid in the fact the FDA has already said Marijuana or Delta-9-THC has medical value they approved it in 1985 and made it legal for marketing in 1992 only this is in reference too Marinol also known as dronabinol the synthetic or man made version of marijuana..

    I guess GOD screwed up so the pharmaceutical companies fixed it for him...What a freaking joke!!! Its my body and my right to use all thing nature and natures God gave me...Keep you damn laws of of my Birth Rights otherwise known as Unalienable Rights.

    Using a plant is not criminal but demanding that someone else cant use a plant is.. Does anyone remember FREEDOM?

    Look this should be the end of the conversation FDA has already said it is medicine!!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  64. It's a plant!! To outlaw nature is stupidity!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  65. DarthNole Idea Submitter

    TO THE MODERATOR:

    Once again I implore you to reconsider including this idea into Phase II of this process. Not only has this idea garned some of the highest support on the site, but it makes good public policy (you know following the law). I have laid out previously why the idea in general clearly meets the purpose of this brainstorm. But the concept goes even further. Once marijuana is correctly removed from Schedule I of the CSA there will need to be a discussion as to where it should be placed. It will be that discussion that the transparency of government can take place. By providing all of the scientific research that has been done (the US Government does hold a patent for medical marijuana). During that discussion the government can seek participation from scientists from around the globe (since the US has effectivle shut out any attempts to research the plant as a whole). After collecting the necessary scientific research and recommendations, the government can collaborate amogst federal agencies (HHS, DEA, DOJ, Agriculture, etc.) to correctly schedule marijuana in the CSA (or not to if that is the prevailing wisdom).

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  66. It's a freedom that humans were born with. The government has no right to say I can't make a personal decision such as smoking marijuana.

    There should be an age limit of 21 for marijuana consumption which may not be completely fair, but at least it gives adults their well deserved freedom.

    Once one personal freedom is sacrificed, the rest are just as vulnerable. Don't be foolish and think for a second that the government has any right to tell me I can't consume marijuana.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  67. We can not consider ourselves "Free" until this action is taken.

    Home of the free and land of the brave?

    I don't think so.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  68. Valid question, especially considering we are currently arresting and jailing individuals for laws no longer supported by the majority of the voters.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  69. Legalize it!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  70. Josh take a look at alcohol prohibition- the usage rate's were actually higher when it was illegal.

    statistics in Netherlands show that their drug usage is actually lower because they don't demonize it and secondly they are closing down prisons left and right, because they don't have this ridiculous drug war which throws half of America in jail because someone chooses the safer alternative for drugs- marijuana.

    http://digg.com/world_news/Netherlands_to_close_prisons_for_lack_of_criminals

    Second of all marijuana has never caused any one cancer in it's 1000's of years in use http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html and studies suggest that it actually has an anti cancer effect http://www.webmd.com/cancer/brain-cancer/news/20090401/marijuana-chemical-may-fight-brain-cancer + you can use a vaporizer or make edibles.................

    \ the government has no right to tell me and millions of other people that they can't smoke marijuana - what is it their business what I put in my body? The nanny government has got to end! it's ridiculous and it's been going on for too long

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  71. I don't feel people should use drugs, but I feel that if they want to, they should have the right to do so without the fear of arrest. As long as they don't commit crimes that put other people, or other peoples property in harms way while using them.

    Alcohol is the drug that is most responsible for violence, and a majority of murder, and violent crimes are directly related to it's use.

    I think the prohibition of drugs has caused far more harm then good to society as a whole. From what the current data shows, only a small percentage of drug users become problem drug users, and those people are most likely already abusing drugs.

    Legalizing, and regulating drugs is the only way to get rid of the violent black market currently in control of illicit drug market, and out of the hands of children.

    Far too many otherwise law abiding citizens are being arrested for drugs

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  72. National petition on change.org:

    http://criminaljustice.change.org/actions/view/legalize_marijuana

    The guy is seeking 100,000 signatures, but I'd bet we can do better than that!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  73. I would like to draw everyone's attention to US patent #6630507 - cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectors, currently held by the United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services.

    The US obtained this patent in 2003. The mere existence of this patent constitutes irrefutable proof that cannabis has accepted medical uses, and should be moved immediately from Schedule I of the Drug Control Act.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  74. http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/6079-4049

    Please vote for unalienable birth rights..Thanks!!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  75. If marijuana has no medical value Why does the US Goverment have a patent for medical marijuana

    US Patent 6630507 - Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants

    Application: filed on 2/02/2001

    US Patent Issued on October 7, 2003

    Assignee: The United States of America, as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services

    How many more must suffer and continue to suffer and DIE? WE THE PEOPLE ask for Compassion from this unjust law

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  76. Mr. Obama,

    Just count the number of votes for and against. the people have given you a directive. Follow through with the will of the majority for once.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  77. Actually, they need to count the votes for all the drug war issue ideas posted and add them up to get close to the real nuimber of supporters. Yes, I know some of us have voted on each of those issues, but that merely makes up for those who never have come to this site but who do support reform of the drug laws.

    If one has a basic knowledge of the Constitution, one knows the government has no legitimate Constitutional authority to tell the people they may not ingest this substance or that one

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  78. What do you think the chances of this passing are...with Pharmaceutical being some of the biggest donors in washington? We need public financing of campaigns. None of this other stuff happens without it.

    VOTE HERE:

    http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/3989-4049

    PUBLIC CAMPAIGN FINANCING

    We must have public financing of campaigns. I know you think you don't want to pay for it...but you already ARE!

    You pay hundreds and thousands of times what you would if the politicians actually answered to you and not greedy corporate criminals. You pay thousands of times more in a CORRUPTION SURCHARGE!

    YOU PAY FOR PRIVATELY FUNDED ELECTIONS RIGHT NOW!

    Every no bid contract, every unpaid royalty on an oil lease, every blocked piece of legislation, every blocked investigation, every effort to get healthcare for all, every blocked attempt for a living wage, every needless nuclear warhead that will never be used, every mountaintop removal mining permit OK’d, every case of cancer caused by lax environmental rules or enforcement, every prison built instead of a school...YOU PAY AND PAY AND PAY!

    And to add insult to injury, where do corporations get the money they give politicians in order to insure they can roll right over you whenever they want? FROM YOU! The cost of these payoffs is passed on to YOU the consumer!

    THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THE COUNTRY!

    Whatever you think is the most important issue facing the country…forget about it. It’s going to be decided in favor of those in power. It will be watered down in favor of those who finance campaigns and control corporate media sources.

    You think the health care debate is going to come out in your favor or Pfizer’s? You think we are really going to cut military spending when more than half of the military budget for the entire world is being lavished on some of the biggest campaign contributors there are? How about Bank reform? Wall Street? Big Pharma? Iraq? The environment? Just exactly how do you see any of that working out in your favor in our current system?

    Our system is broken. Our government does not work for the people. It works for – or in fear of – people who can spend a lot of money, access a lot of media, or have a lot of power in society.

    IT’S THE MODERATES!

    What people don’t understand is that it is not necessary to buy off the whole government in order for corporate, big money interests to get its way…every time. You merely need to control either the moderates and/or the committee heads in order to assure that whatever compromise is reached it will ALWAYS benefit BIG MONEY!

    In Congress, you have partisans on either side, in safe districts, with entrenched interests who won’t compromise and are at no risk of being voted out.

    Then you have the folks in the purple districts. They could get the ax anytime. Their elections could come down to which candidate has a few thousand more to spend. If Big Money goes their way they stay, if it goes to their opponent they are out.

    These are the people you count on to forge the compromise between the two extremes and these are the very people who are most vulnerable to big money coming in hard and heavy against them.

    COMPROMISE IS ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF BIG MONEY!

    The current system assures that any compromise between the partisan extremes will be concluded in favor of big money. Even the most conscientious moderate politician in a contested state MUST cater to big money or they will not stay in congress.

    WHAT HAPPENED TO CONGRESS?

    Do you wonder what has happened to democrats in congress over the last 8 years…the spinelessness and cowardice evidenced by these people?

    This is the result of what happens to an organization over time when anyone who fights big money gets weeded out…even if it’s only one or two per election. Eventually you are left with …well, what we have now…a bunch of corporate lap dogs.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  79. We the people who smoke it, will continue to do so no matter what the laws are!!!!! It just makes more logical sense to allow it rather than to fight it. No matter how long the government fights it, we will continue to smoke it. The laws are just pushing more poeple to grow it in small amounts on their own. At least this will keep it out of the mafia's and governement officials hands....as many of our "law" agencies want it to stay illegal for their own money making agendas.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  80. I just want to know why alcohol and tobacco are excluded from the Controlled Substances Act when they fit PERFECTLY into schedule 1 and are the drugs that cause the most deaths. Seemingly the government doesn't give a hoot about our health. They just want our money.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  81. iskate284, I couldn't agree more.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  82. iskate248: Dead on the money! And by that, I mean, IT'S DEFINITELY THE MONEY!

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  83. Here's something for you to smoke... lol

    http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/7437-4049

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  84. Kind of a long statement but if you’re interested in a creative way to make a statement you might b interested in reading.

    http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/7622-4049

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  85. I believe we spend far to much money prosecuting people for this. We could stop all the issues in the Mexican boarder towns within a year by implimenting a new, very sound goverment control over the drug. Let the FDA take over, and people will be legal, and not have to work with dealers, who are all scetchy to begin with.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  86. Democracy:

    A government of the masses.

    Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.

    Results in mobocracy.

    Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights.

    Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.

    Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

    Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success.

    A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."

    A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.

    Republic:

    Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.

    Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.

    Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.

    A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.

    Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.

    Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.

    A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of:

    an executive and

    a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create

    a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize

    certain inherent individual rights.

    Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.

    Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."

    A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.

    Difference between Democracy and Republic, in brief:

    Democracy:

    a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority.

    b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.

    Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences

    Republic

    a: a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government.

    b: a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.

    Democracy and Republic are often taken as one of the same thing, but there is a fundamental difference. Whilst in both cases the government is elected by the people, in Democracy the majority rules according to their whims, whilst in the Republic the Government rule according to law. This law is framed in the Constitution to limit the power of Government and ensuring some rights and protection to Minorities and individuals.

    The difference between Republic and Righteous Republic is that in the Republic the Government rules according to the law set up by men, in the Righteous Republic the law is the Law of God. Only in the Righteous Republic it can truly be said "One nation under God" for it is governed under commandments of the only One True God and there is no pluralism of religions.

    Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered.

    Mobocracy: 1. Political control by a mob. 2. The mass of common people as the source of political control.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  87. Legalize it, tax the sale and tax the earnings from those who grow it and profit from it. That will certainly help the economy, cut down arrests and improve the deficit.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  88. Elihusmith is correct.

    Legalization for personal use is the only sure method to eliminate cross-border underground "trafficking" and remove those sources of income from true criminals.

    Taxation should be applied on those who grow commercially, and those commercial operations should also be regulated to ensure purity, potency and quality of the product, as it is with every other commercial product.

    Let's face it, most people will probably opt to purchase their cannabis or cannabis medical products (in whatever form they may take) from a legitimate dispensary, compassion club or pharmacy (depending on the type of cannabis product) rather than to grow their own, so this will likely be a fairly large market to tax. It won't even need new regulatory bodies or new taxes since the existing market is nearly 100% underground, hence, is completely untaxed at present, so this would mean that the tax gains using only existing provincial/state and federal sales taxes would be completely new revenues, and the savings in law enforcement, courts, legal and prison expenses would simply be more gravy for the government to soak up with their preexisting huge pile of undeserved and unearned biscuits.

    But first, it must be legalized for personl use. No tax plan (scheme) or regulatory system can be effectively created--let alone enacted--before the true size of the potential market is assessed.

    5 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed

Vote Activity Show

(latest 20 votes)