Marijuana.com

MMJNoob

The difference is that crack causes a physical addiction. Marijuana does not. Dependence on marijuana is psychological.

In the future, I'd refrain from calling people stupid until you've checked your facts.

__________________
Tell your Representative to Support H.R. 5843: Act to Remove Federal Penalties for Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults. It shouldn't take more than 2 minutes of your time. Please also Support H.R. 5842: Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act

 

Daddyo

Something I have noticed within our ranks(pro marijuana) which has bothered me is our lack of strength which as I perceive originates from a multitude of small groups vieing for preemminence among opposing positions. That article is very up to date; everything mentioned there which caused potheads to lose so much ground towards decriminalization
is being repeated.

I am going to post a response I made in another forum which illustrates just how devious our leaders are on the subject of marijuana......
..
Your wondering how much of Frank's money is in growing or distributing crews shows how little you know about Barney Frank. He is one of the most honest people in Congress, someone who's not in it just for his own benefits.

He has a reputation of almost always voting according to the Constitution, something I assume you despise as it gives individuals rights & limits Federal powers.

You have expressed thinly veiled hatred of most if not all cannabis users. It must be very amusing for you to show your buddies you have "super stoner" under your name. GWTJ
---------------

So, if a theory doesn`t fit your political outlook, you dismiss it out of Hand? No; in all honesty, I`m not certain what provoked your reaction. If you find something which says I oppose Barney Frank based on anything other than policy issues, be sure to let me know. The information I posted on House resolution 5843 was only intended to display the reluctance of even one of the strongest supporters of marijuana reform in government is reluctant to go all the way, so to speak. The key to understanding Barney Frank and a multitude of powerful people in Washington DC is to know that many of them have insulated themselves from exposure to the very laws they uphold and enact. Read this....

....Asked whether the resolution's passage would change his personal behavior, Frank quipped, "I do obey every law I vote for" but quickly said he did not use marijuana, nor does he encourage it.
"I smoke cigars. I don't think other people should do that. If young people ask me, I would advise them not to do it," he said.
If HR 5843 were passed, the House would support marijuana smokers possessing up to 100 grams -- about 3½ ounces -- of cannabis without being arrested. It would also give its blessing to the "nonprofit transfer" of up to an ounce of marijuana.
The resolution would not address laws forbidding growing, importing or exporting marijuana, or selling it for profit. The resolution also would not speak to state laws regarding marijuana use."

Did you not pick up the double speak in Congressman Frank`s response to the press? In his description of his afinity for smoking cigars, he indirectly spoke to the issue of marijuana; in effect, what he said was that he would also discourage people from smoking marijuana. People hear what they want to hear; this is why politicians who are successful, as Barney Frank is, must be able to tell as many people as possible what they want to hear; that is precisely what Congressman Frank did with his allusion to his cigar smoking.

"If I have been hard on a lot of cannabis users, it has nothing to do with the consumption of marijuana. I myself smoke cannabis; as a matter of fact, as I type this post I am stonedtodabone on some righteous outdoor green bud which is now in it`s 28th generation of lineage. From appearances you draw the conclusion that I hate anyone here? My my mi madre`; you should be a conspiracy theorist yourself. The clashing of countenence against countenence sharpens both. Activists love to practice on keen adversaries; or are you just another bump on a log who fails to understand that principle? hATE??!! I love to argue; it`s elemental to the democratic process to take a contrary stance to those with whom you find contrary to your principles. Besides chum; if never a benjamin ever appeared on CCForum, all you`d ever have to say is,"Death to America","Israel must be wiped off the Map"< and other such subversive cliche`s, and that could get awful boring. Just ask the Cuban Olympic boxing and baseball players "
-----------
I confess that I am very harsh toward anyone who tries to piggyback hard drugs onto marijuana law reform; there is no end to the suffering and pain caused by addiction which I have not only witnessed, but have suffered loss at the hand of addicts.

I honestly believe that dividing marijuana use into multiple categories of positions serves to weaken the amount of political pressure we can apply to deceiptful politicians like Barney Frank and a multitude of others who refuse to make a firm commitment toward legalizing marijuana. The testimony given by the man who went down for posession was never addressed in HR5843; there have been times in my life when I myself could have been busted in posession of enough marijuana for decades, leaving my family to adjust to life without me being there for them. All this resolution does is to encourage more people to smoke more marijuana which increases distribution; which in turn puts more people behind bars for longer sentences for very little gain in reducing serious crime. I am well and truly disgusted with my criminal justice system because there are too many people being released from custody who should be jailed to protect us, while others are serving Federal minimum sentences for What, selling buds? There`s your injustice, people suffering harsher punishments for less harmful activities.

Daddyo

Barney Frank Introduces Bold Reform of Federal Marijuana Laws


April 17, 2008

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Officials of the Marijuana Policy Project praised the "Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008," introduced today by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), as an important step toward bringing federal law into line with scientific fact, practical reality and public opinion.
"Congressman Frank's bill represents a major step toward sanity in federal marijuana policy," said MPP director of government relations Aaron Houston. "The decades-long federal war on marijuana protects no one and in fact has ruined countless lives. Most Americans do not believe that simple possession of a small amount of marijuana should be a criminal matter, and it's time Congress listened to the voters."
Frank's bill would remove federal criminal penalties for possession of up to 100 grams of marijuana and the not-for-profit transfer of up to one ounce (28.3 grams) of marijuana. It would not change marijuana's status as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act, and would not change federal laws prohibiting the cultivation of marijuana, sale of marijuana for profit, or import or export of marijuana. It also would not affect any state or local marijuana laws or regulations.
An October 2005 Gallup poll found that 55 percent of voters believe "possession of small amounts of marijuana ... should not be treated as a criminal offense," while only 43 percent believed marijuana possession should be a criminal matter. Eleven states treat possession of a small amount of marijuana as a relatively minor offense – often a civil infraction rather than a criminal offense – that generally does not involve arrest and jail. In Alaska, possession of up to one ounce of marijuana in the home is legal, protected by the right to privacy guaranteed by the state constitution.
"In fact, federal prosecution of individuals for possession of a small amount of marijuana is extremely rare," said Houston. "Congressman Frank's bill would bring federal law into line with this reality, as well as with the undisputable scientific fact that marijuana is far safer than legal drugs such as tobacco and alcohol."
With more than 23,000 members and 180,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. Barney Frank Introduces Bold Reform of Federal Marijuana Laws

I wouldn`t go so far as to praise Barney Frank for introducing a very flawed piece of legislation. I already called his office and politely asked them to tell the congressman how disappointed I was that the bill didn`t secure a means to obtain a safe, secure supply. Are they going to start spraying paraquat again? gOD dAMN iT!

Buzzby

You seem to be trying to drag this thread off-topic. What does Barney Frank's proposed legislation have to do with the question "Is it really harmless?"

__________________

Everlong2019

the only thing about it that is harmful is the fact that your inhaling hot smoke into your lungs, and yes, MAYBE when smoking marijuana, stepping up to harder stuff is a smaller leap than from starting at straightedge and then going to heroin, but still, as compared to any other illegal drug, it is the LEAST harmful.

 

MMJNoob

Useful articles but more along the lines of why is marijuana illegal. There's a thread about that going right now.

I see this as more of a health related thread than a political one.
Smoking it is more harmful than vaporizing. Edibles are the least harmful. They provide more health benefits as well, from what I understand.

I think a big part of why marijuana can be a gateway drug is because the dealer that provides the marijuana is likely pushing other drugs too. But that's political too.

From what I understand there is evidence some of other negative effects as well. Memory issues being one of them of course. Many of us can probably attest to that one and scientific research supports the theory.