Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here
What Can I Do?


Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP
Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE
Resources
Resources
Find useful publications, online documents & more.


DrugScreening.org


 

Congressional Resolution Would Decriminalize Some Marijuana Use
July 31, 2008

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is leading the effort to adopt a congressional resolution that would allow marijuana users to possess up to about 3.5 ounces of the drug without fear of arrest, CNN reported July 30.

In introducing House Resolution 5843, the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008, Frank and his allies said the measure would not decriminalize misuse of the drug. The resolution does not address laws against growing marijuana or selling it for profit, and does not speak to existing state laws on marijuana use.

Groups in support of Frank's stance, such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), compared the resolution to existing U.S. policy on alcohol, a legal product with laws governing its misuse.

"The vast amount of human activity ought to be none of the government's business," said Frank, who told reporters that he neither smokes marijuana nor encourages others to do so.

U.S. Representative and 2008 presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-Texas) is Frank's co-sponsor on the resolution. Other House supporters include Reps. William Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who believe current marijuana enforcement unfairly targets African-Americans.

Federal government agencies have long opposed any marijuana decriminalization initiatives, with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) pointing out that people charged with simple possession offenses rarely end up incarcerated. 

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by Donald B Parsons on 07 Aug 08 09:54 AM EDT
Marijuana was made illegal in 1937 for PREJUDICIAL reasons and nothing to do with any dangers associated with the drug Alcohol would still be illegal if not for all the violence and the revolution by the people to RE- legalize the drink. This is the Ganja-revolution where the people are telling "THEIR" government, "WE THE PEOPLE" want what "WE THE PEOPLE" want and Mr. Frank is "OUR" voice in Congress. In reference to the House Bill I mentioned earlier. H.B. 5842 although that is another House Bill on the medical side I was refering to H.B. 5843. Mr. Frank has no horse in this race he just knows where "OUR" government's NOSE doesn't belong.

Posted by Donald B Parsons on 07 Aug 08 09:42 AM EDT
The TRUE Gateway drug is Alcohol as anyone who has walked these roads knows. Alcohol is ADDICTIVE physically, where marijuana is addictive physcologically. For people with a TRUE addiction to ANY substance from food to drugs and anything in between has a deeper problem than the substance they are addicted to. I gave up alcohol after a 23 year addiction,because I CHOSE TO. I gave up a 27 year addiction to tobacco, because I CHOSE TO. "OUR" government HAS NO BUSINESS telling the American people what they can and can not do within the soveriegnty of ones own body. Stan, Do you remember the history of Alcohol Prohibition? The prohibition itself allowed the likes of Al Capone and the Purple Gang to take over the alcohol industry and create all the violence that ensued for the 13 years of prohibition. ALCOHOL is the MOST ADDICTIVE and WIDELY ABUSED drug in American history but THE PEOPLE want what THE PEOPLE want and prohibition has done nothing to stop that as marijuana like it or not is America's No.#1 cash crop.

Posted by Donald B Parsons on 07 Aug 08 09:16 AM EDT
Stan , The Harrison Act of 1914 was created due to the Mormon leadership in Utah fearing a lot of followers were leaving the state for various reasons and returning with marijuana. The Mormon leadership feared the drug would create FREE thought and destroy the collective Mormon thought process. Rep. Barney Frank's motivation is to STOP "OUR" government from WASTING taxpayer $dollars$ on such things as inane "War on Drugs" ads that DO NOT work, incarcerating 700,000 NON-VIOLENT drug offenders in 2006 (the last year stats were done). Barney Frank originally wanted to call the bill (H.R.5842) Make room for REAL criminals. More than 70% of Americans surveyed say they are O.K. with Legalizing MEDICAL marijuana as is in 13 states to date. 38% of Americans surveyed say they are O.K. with outright legalization and regulation of marijuana.

Posted by Stan Orner on 05 Aug 08 11:35 PM EDT
You know, this is absolutely insane and I would look at the motivation of Barney Frank to determine why such an action would even be considered. Marijuana is a gateway drug and is addictive. I know, I lived it. There are reasons the Harrison Act was created in 1914. Most of the people who were addicted to laudanum and the cocaine in Coca Cola. LSD was legal until the 60s until the long term consequences were realized. Marijuana has no medical or social value and the American people should not stand for any legislation that will decriminalize drugs of abuse. Period.

Posted by Rebecca Howell on 05 Aug 08 10:18 AM EDT
Serious about understanding the potential consequences (+/-) of decriminalizing or legalizing (regulated) marijuana/other currently illegal drugs in the U.S.? I urge you to read MacCoun and Reuter's "Drug War Heresies" (2001), a methodologically sound 10-year study on U.S. drug policy with respect to mar, coke, & heroin. They forecast: decrim. mar = harms (indiv/social) less than those currently under prohibition, but more harms if outright legal/regulated (use/dep forecasted to increase); decrim/legal of coke/heroin = harms outweigh those currently under prohibition. Important issues most people do not think about: interaction b/w our hedonistic culture, drug-laden society, & 1st Amendment rights (freedom of press, advertising). When changing from current policy to decrim/legal., important to think about changes in drug law mechanisms & resultant consequences. Drug law mechanisms: drug availability, price, purity, symbolic threshold, forbidden fruit, bolstering of informal social norms, labeling effects. Any policy change will change these mechanisms, w/ consequent changes in rates of use/abuse/dep & other costs.

Posted by Bernie Ellis on 05 Aug 08 08:37 AM EDT
Good to see many people involved in this discussion (but I wish everyone -- on both sides of the issue -- would spell-check their responses before posting. "There" and "their" are not interchangable.) Classifying marijuana as equal to heroin and PCP in the Controlled Substances Act (and ranking it as more harmful than cocaine and methamphetamine) is absurd. It matters not that our current government policies are justified by this decision, which has no basis in science or practical experience. What matters is that, in a "real" democracy, stupid government decisions can be changed. We know why that hasn't happened in the past -- the historical vested interests (paper, pharmaceuticals, alcohol, etc) and the new criminal justice-forced treatment-industrial complex. I applaud Congress-critters Frank, Paul and others for this legislation. And BTW, I think the prices now charged for med pot in California are immoral and cruel for sick folks. New Mexico has a better plan, if they will only find the cajones to implement it as intended. For more information on where I stand (and walk) on this issue, see saveberniesfarm.com .

Posted by Jim Smith on 05 Aug 08 04:56 AM EDT
Here's a question for all who are against decrimalization, Do you drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes? If so, why do you support those that are harmfull drugs as well - both are addictive? Each one of them separatly kill more people each year than marijuana. Marijuana has medical purpose's along with other uses that the economy could benefit from like we use to. Hemp has always had beneficial uses.

Posted by Bert Massiah on 04 Aug 08 02:39 PM EDT
When will we get a Govt. intelligent and brave enough to legalize all aspects of the production, marketing and distribution of all addictive substances. They need to legalize all aspects related to these drugs, develop clear enforcable and responsible regulations and fund effective educational and treatment programs and then use all the profits to pay for these programs.

Posted by BRISEIDA HERRERA on 04 Aug 08 01:31 PM EDT
I think that the Goverment should focus on laws to prevent the use, and the research for treatments to cure drug addiction,instead of taking the easy road out, make it legal, that is so irresponsable to even think of such laws, how many families have been destroyed and are being destroy due to the use of drugs, making it legal does not solve the problem, cure the source and you can eradicated the problem.

Posted by Donald B Parsons on 04 Aug 08 01:25 PM EDT
GREAT POSTS!!! I enjoyed reading them ALL for and against.. KUDOS

Posted by Frankie James on 04 Aug 08 12:59 PM EDT
When you consider all the harmful, mind-altering drugs that are PRESCRIBED by “doctors” and used by millions each year (legally or illegally) this argument is just ridiculous! Marijuana should be legalized- end of discussion. We should be allowed to posses as much as we want and if we want to go into business growing and selling it (last time I checked we were capitalists!) then we’ll happily pay taxes. If you don’t want to use it then don’t, but as you are ingesting whatever drugs your “doctor” has prescribed for you PLEASE don’t wag your finger at me!

Posted by Barbara on 04 Aug 08 12:49 PM EDT
Marijuana these days has a very high THC content, which may seem like a cause for celebration to some. However, it's not fair to those who are particularly susceptible to either the neurological or the psychological impact of compulsively ingesting THC to portray pot as an innocent recreational drug. There are real consequences, perhaps not lethal ones, but death is not always the worst outcome. The USA has a very ambivalent attitude toward drugs, including alcohol, nicotine, Ibuprofin, Viagra, Prozac...I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. Most importantly, don't let advertising make decisions about your health for you, no matter who's writing the ad.

Posted by Heather Carr on 04 Aug 08 11:11 AM EDT
Marijuana has similar health risks and has similar "mind-altering" effects as alcohol and cigarettes, so why should there be more restrictions placed on MJ than on our currently legalized drugs? Adults should be able to make their own informed decisions about using or not using all three of these substances. Sure, there are risks, but there even more risks associated with the drugs our doctors prescribe to us. And regarding the argument that more kids will use marijuana - News flash! Young people are ALREADY using MJ. And not just in big cities. As a former high school teacher in a small town, I've seen that first hand. No, teenagers should not be able to legally use marijuana, just as they are not legally allowed to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. There minds are not fully developed and their decision-making abilities are not mature. But the responsibility for keeping kids off of all drugs, legal or not, falls on the PARENTS! All of the kids I taught that were using marijuana were able to do so because there parents did not have close relationships with them or turned a blind eye to what they were doing. No law could or should take the place of responsible parenting!

Posted by Deirdre on 04 Aug 08 10:09 AM EDT
Legalising drugs increases costs and the number of people dependent on them. "Annual drug-related deaths are about 1,600 people a year -- compared to 22,000 from alcohol, 90,000-100,000 deaths from tobacco – even benzodiazepine-related deaths each year exceed that of all illegal drugs except heroin. The harms by making drugs legal are multiples of illegal drugs, indicating that lessening their availability is a better option than legalisation." “Alcohol-related harm costs around £20billion a year” - Tony Blair, “The annual cost of alcohol misuse includes... up to 22,000 premature deaths per annum.” “In Britain, 6 million deaths were caused by tobacco over the past 50 years” Average – 120,000 pa. “Involuntary addiction to prescribed tranquillisers is the most serious drug problem in the UK today. Benzodiazepine-related deaths each year exceed that of all illegal drugs except heroin. The number of addicts (1.5 million) exceeds those addicted to all illegal drugs.” Hospital emergency visits: alcohol-related 48.7% cocaine 20% marijuana 12.6%. References at www.addictiontoday.org/addictiontoday/2008/05/cannabis-the-fa.html

Posted by Branden Johnson on 04 Aug 08 09:47 AM EDT
I am surprised that the supporters of this bill have tried to pull out the race card likewas done with the reduction of cocaine laws last year. Being black myself I dont think this matters with any drug. If you have it and its illegal you get arrested. Marijuana does destroy brain activity just like alcohol and tobacco so the supporters are saying lets kill another large chunk of america. Sounds like terrorism to me.

Posted by Jim Sharp on 02 Aug 08 08:37 PM EDT
Yes, there are costs associated with the legalization of any mind-altering drug. These costs, however, must be weighed against the costs of prohibition. The costs of prohibition include: billions of dollars each year spent on trying to control and intercept drugs, skyrocketing prison populations, untold numbers of citizens whose lives are ruined by being thrown into the criminal justice system, etc. With legalization/regulation of these drugs a portion of this money could go towards prevention/treatment which, when adequately funded, would ameliorate many of the costs of legalization. Let's have the government lay out all the options and their related costs instead of putting all the eggs into the prohibition basket.

Posted by Tom Letson on 02 Aug 08 06:41 PM EDT
One of the issues that rarely is discussed regarding the potential legalization of marijuana is the increased availablity to teens and what impact that will have. The number one drug of abuse among teens is alcohol. Why? Because its legal status naturally leads to more availablilty to teens. The same thing will happen if marijuana is legalized. Now, marijuana legalization advocates will be quick to point out that marijuana will be a safer underage choice for teens as compared to alcohol because you cannot overdose on pot. We all know that is true, but will an advocate please comment on what the state of our schools may be like if marijuana legalization skyrockets availability to young developing minds?

Posted by Jose C on 01 Aug 08 08:41 PM EDT
First lets look at the other two leglaized drugs and Marijuana. 1. Are we making money by taxing it? Tabbaco, Alcohol: NO, not when you add all the health and insurance cost asociated with each. MJ definite No, for the same reasons. 2. Will it improve your quality of life: In the beginning, Yes for all. That is the hook. But not for the 400,000, tobacco, 100,000, alcohol who have die every year due to it's use. Not to mention the millions who suffer health problems. How about MJ? a definite no. Since 35% of emergency room visits are associaled with MJ use, 17% for MJ and Alcohol, it is sure to increase the annual death rate for MJ use as well as the health problems of the user. People are crazy to legalize one more mind altering drug. MJ like alcohol and tobacco start out as a choice but to some it will become an addiction. To most the health cost will become to expansive for them to pay, so the American public will foot the bills. We can not afford to legalize another mind altering addictive drug. Say what you want but there are people who do not smoke MJ just because it is illegal. Making small amounts legal will open up pandoras box.

Posted by Jim Sharp on 01 Aug 08 02:39 PM EDT
Yes, let's add marijuana to the list of decriminalized but regulated drugs. That list currently includes: tobacco, alcohol, demerol, oxycontin, buprenorphine, etc. At some point, when we come to our senses, we'll decide to re-evaluate all drugs and declare the drug war over. The savings of such a rational decison will be great in both dollars and lives.

Posted by Joe Moterotz on 01 Aug 08 02:20 PM EDT
Lets see, what have we learned? 25 million (25,000,000.) Americans smoke marijuana. What should we do? Say to them: "your all sick, get help" who diagnosed each person to make that conclusion? or "you are all a bunch of reefer mad freaks who belong behind bars." That's an intelligent solution.....maybe for MARS! Why has marijuana been demonized all these American years? Could it be to supress hemp? I do not have an answer but it seems a little twisted, given that the gateway- theory of marijuana use leading to heroin addiction is a preposterous end-around argument. Just because most heroin addicts first used pot does not mean most users of pot will become HEROIN ADDICTS! The fact remains this: all past and present societies who've adopted more liberal drug policies have a much better handle on their drug issue than those governments who take a much harder stand on drugs. Our learning becomes impeded when we are no longer led by experience but by ideas; by what should be rather than what is.

Posted by Charlie on 01 Aug 08 01:10 PM EDT
The war on drugs is about as successful as the war on alcohol was during prohibition. The war on marijuana is a waste of money, a waste of potential revenue and a denial of the fact tat marijuana is the #1 cash crop in America outdistancing corn, wheat, and tobacco.

Posted by Paul A Brown on 01 Aug 08 01:00 PM EDT
I do understand there position, which is the government telling us the people what we can and cannot consume. Indeed, many drug users may find this emancipation of marijuana heaven, I do not. I have felt personal loss of close friends over drugs, and marijuana, in particular. A good friend of mine was murdered at his dorm room while being robbed by individuals whom only took his marijuana, and others who, with utmost potential and ability, fell short of their expectations, whom later became heavy drug users of a variety that I cannot know. This paradoxical resolution provides itself with a dilemma, previously stated, and, that is, does the government have the right to tell the people what we can and cannot consume, with great reason, I say no they cannot. So in the foreground, and long forgotten, is the moral compass that each human holds, and, that is, where the decision of use and no-use, legal or illegal, should be made, additionally, will the proliferation of such a resolution endanger the public when this substance is taken in combination with other substances, and should we take such precarious substances that stand the greater possibility of enhancing that risk?

Posted by Gary Wandelt on 01 Aug 08 12:15 PM EDT
Opening the door to legalizing any mind-altering illegal drug would be harmful to the public in itself, as well as encouraging and allowing other more dangerous drugs to be made legal also. This is not a safe consumer produce, nor will it stop drug-related crimes. Legalizing it for taxe revenue is wrong. Thinking there will be controls over it is wrong. It's just wrong to do. How would you like to have your surgeon smoking marijuana, airline pilots, truck drivers, teachers, goverment leaders, police, people you don't know and people you love? Write the wrong to your Representatives.

Posted by Alfred Eichler on 01 Aug 08 11:40 AM EDT
Prohibition does not work. The war on drugs is a falacy. It's a war on people. Education is the key. Aloow adults to make informed decisions. Treat addiction. Control the source and tax it, put the money in prevention and treatment. People will use drugs regardless or the laws.

Posted by Brenda Hanken on 01 Aug 08 11:08 AM EDT
Just the THOUGHT of decriminalizing marijuana for personal use is mindboggling! I’m not even sure that marijuana use for medicinal purposes is the right thing to do. Marijuana has been considered the "gateway" drug for as long as I can remember. Would the new gateway drug then be cocaine? Marijuana effects a person’s level of motivation, academic achievement, social circle, activity level, responsibility and work ethic. I have seen the destruction of (2 high school student marijuana users) future. Research shows that smoking one joint has the same negative effects on the body as smoking five cigarettes. I do not believe that decriminalizing marijuana is in the best interest of youth, adolescents, and young adults.

Posted by Jack on 01 Aug 08 11:05 AM EDT
It's about time we come to our senses about marijuana laws. My concern is, if it remains illegal to grow it, people will have to continue to purchase it from someone who is growing it illegally. Perhaps the legislation should allow a limited number of plants to be grown and harvested for personal consumption.

Posted by Michael K. Fore on 01 Aug 08 10:41 AM EDT
I feel that the state is perpatrating a greater crime when they charge, convict, and sentence someone for marijuana use than the user is guilty of.

Posted by Donald B Parsons on 01 Aug 08 09:14 AM EDT
Federal government agencies have long opposed any marijuana decriminalization initiatives, with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) pointing out that people charged with simple possession offenses rarely end up incarcerated. Tell that to Rachel Hoffman. Thats right, you can't tell her because she was killed when the LAW sent her into a DANGEROUS situation to bust drug dealers who killed her. What was Rachel's crime?, you ask, She was busted with a personal amount of marijuana and 2 Ecstasy pills and coerced into informing for a more lenient sentence.

Your Turn! Post a public comment (read guidelines):

Name:

Comment:
(limit 200
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
To keep this feature useful for all, please:

  1. Keep it clean, courteous, and on-topic. Comments are meant for thoughtful discussion of the article published above.

  2. Do not post promotional links to organizations, products or services, or personal requests for assistance (get help).

  3. Proof your comments carefully, use good spelling and punctuation, and don't use ALL CAPS. Comments are published immediately and cannot be edited.

Deceptive, slanderous and commercially-motivated posts are prohibited. We reserve the right to remove comments not conforming to these guidelines. (Report a comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.