We The People - Petition the President

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

Bump for change
[qoute]







It cant hurt to help, but if we want a REAL change in the nations MJ laws we should all be backing HR 2306 and getting in touch with these people---->
It's good that he has to face these questions from us, but the truth is he cant do anything about it.

He cannot just throw down an executive order to legalize marijuana.

the people would should be bombarding with questions everyday are these people-

Majority Members (Republican)
F. James (Jim) Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-WI) [Chairman] 202-225-5101 202-225-3190 http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/email_zip.htm
Louie Gohmert (R-TX) 202-225-3035 202-226-1230 http://gohmert.house.gov/Contact/
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) 202-225-5431 202-225-9681 http://goodlatte.house.gov/contact/index.shtml
Dan Lungren (R-CA) 202-225-5716 202-226-1298 https://lungren.house.gov//index.cfm?sectionid=84&sec …
J. Randy Forbes (R-VA) 202-225-6365 202-226-1170 http://randyforbes.house.gov/Contact/ZipAuth.htm
Ted Poe (R-TX) 202-225-6565 202-225-5547 http://poe.house.gov/contact/contactform.htm
Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) 202-225-7751 202-225-5629 https://chaffetz.house.gov/contact/email-me.shtml
Tim Griffin (R-AR) 202-225-2506 202-225-5903 https://griffin.house.gov/contact-me/email-me
Tom Marino (R-PA) 202-225-3731 202-225-9594 https://marino.house.gov/contact-me/email-me
Trey Gowdy (R-SC) 202-225-6030 202-226-1177 http://gowdy.house.gov/Contact/
Sandy Adams (R-FL) 202-225-2706 202-226-6299 http://adams.house.gov/Contact/
Ben Quayle (R-AZ) 202-225-3361 202-225-3462 https://quayle.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=58§i …


Minority Members (Democrats)
Member Name DC Phone DC FAX Contact Form
Bobby Scott (D-VA) [Ranking Member] 202-225-8351 202-225-8354 https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Steve Cohen (D-TN) 202-225-3265 202-225-5663 http://cohen.house.gov/index.php?option=com_email_for …
Hank Johnson (D-GA) 202-225-1605 202-226-0691 https://hankjohnsonforms.house.gov/contact-form.shtml
Pedro Pierluisi (D-PR) 202-225-2615 202-225-2154 http://pierluisi.house.gov/english/contact-us.html
Judy Chu (D-CA) 202-225-5464 202-225-5467 https://forms.house.gov/chu/contact-form.shtml
Ted Deutch (D-FL) 202-225-3001 202-225-5974 https://deutchforms.house.gov/Forms/WriteYourRep/defa …
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) 202-225-7931 202-226-2052 http://wassermanschultz.house.gov/contact/email-me.sh …
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) 202-225-3816 202-225-3317 http://www.jacksonlee.house.gov/Contact/
Mike Quigley (D-IL) 202-225-4061 202-225-5603 https://forms.house.gov/quigley/contact-form.shtml

These fine folks represent the House Commitee on the Judiciary:Subcommitee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. This is where the decriminalization bill Ron Paul and Barney Frank introduced earlier this year. This bill will stall here if we do not contact these people feverently. It still may, but its an actual chance. stop asking some guy if he would sign a bill that will never see his desk unless we contact these house members.



END MARIJUANA PROHIBITION![/QUOTE]

 

[schwagg]

wow they answered a student debt question but nothing about mj.

 

[Smoke Buddy]

Uncle Tom? This president is anything BUT an uncle tom. He would have to consider himself to be of low status and subservient specifically to white people... I dont see that at all. This has ZERO to do with race. Its politics and BAD politics at that. What I see is an arrogant, stubborn, sneaky communist that loves watching all you followers, that he actually sees as part of whats wrong with America, follow him blindly into destruction of the free market system which he hates because he is actually a socialist and a marxist judging by his own words. He loves getting the "blind and deaf" to help him destroy that horrible capitalism... stupidity at its height really... Uncle Tom he aint, that would be giving him a pass and inventing an invisible boogie man (white masters) to blame for HIS deeds. Nope, he owns his policies and his deeds. Uncle Tom he aint, evil ass hole commie he is.

 

[CheddarProf]

Oh... nevermind.

they responded...


https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/response/what-we-have-say-about-legalizing-marijuana
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petitions/popular/0/2/0/

 

[Tony Aroma]

Big surprise! At least they carefully considered the question and based their answer on "science and research." I feel so much better now knowing our nation will be safe from the devil's weed for the foreseeable future.

What We Have to Say About Legalizing Marijuana
By: Gil Kerlikowske

When the President took office, he directed all of his policymakers to develop policies based on science and research, not ideology or politics. So our concern about marijuana is based on what the science tells us about the drug's effects.

According to scientists at the National Institutes of Health- the world's largest source of drug abuse research - marijuana use is associated with addiction, respiratory disease, and cognitive impairment. We know from an array of treatment admission information and Federal data that marijuana use is a significant source for voluntary drug treatment admissions and visits to emergency rooms. Studies also reveal that marijuana potency has almost tripled over the past 20 years, raising serious concerns about what this means for public health – especially among young people who use the drug because research shows their brains continue to develop well into their 20's. Simply put, it is not a benign drug.

Like many, we are interested in the potential marijuana may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses. That is why we ardently support ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine. To date, however, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition.

As a former police chief, I recognize we are not going to arrest our way out of the problem. We also recognize that legalizing marijuana would not provide the answer to any of the health, social, youth education, criminal justice, and community quality of life challenges associated with drug use.

That is why the President's National Drug Control Strategy is balanced and comprehensive, emphasizing prevention and treatment while at the same time supporting innovative law enforcement efforts that protect public safety and disrupt the supply of drugs entering our communities. Preventing drug use is the most cost-effective way to reduce drug use and its consequences in America. And, as we've seen in our work through community coalitions across the country, this approach works in making communities healthier and safer. We're also focused on expanding access to drug treatment for addicts. Treatment works. In fact, millions of Americans are in successful recovery for drug and alcoholism today. And through our work with innovative drug courts across the Nation, we are improving our criminal justice system to divert non-violent offenders into treatment.

Our commitment to a balanced approach to drug control is real. This last fiscal year alone, the Federal Government spent over $10 billion on drug education and treatment programs compared to just over $9 billion on drug related law enforcement in the U.S.

Thank you for making your voice heard. I encourage you to take a moment to read about the President's approach to drug control to learn more.

 

[stihgnobevoli]

anyway resume business as usual.

 

[xmobotx]

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=224525

someone needs to tell them that joke isn't funny

 

[Cappy]

At the very least, Bush didn't lie to us about it. Fuck you Obama. Fuck you to hell.

 

[CannaBunkerMan]

 

[Midnight Rudy]

ugg... What a bunch of crap. There are a bunch of new petitions about removing the drug czar and some other new ones requesting specific answers to the 8 petitions they answered with one response.

For the record, the hemp petition is still up there and so is the end the drug war petition. It will be interesting to see how they respond to those... especially the hemp petition.

 

[Preacher]

Cross-posting this from the White House response thread. And please remind me never to take Tony Aroma up on a formal bet.

When the President took office, he directed all of his policymakers to develop policies based on science and research, not ideology or politics. So our concern about marijuana is based on what the science tells us about the drug's effects.

According to scientists at the National Institutes of Health- the world's largest source of drug abuse research - marijuana use is associated with addiction, respiratory disease, and cognitive impairment. We know from an array of treatment admission information and Federal data that marijuana use is a significant source for voluntary drug treatment admissions and visits to emergency rooms. Studies also reveal that marijuana potency has almost tripled over the past 20 years, raising serious concerns about what this means for public health – especially among young people who use the drug because research shows their brains continue to develop well into their 20's. Simply put, it is not a benign drug.

Like many, we are interested in the potential marijuana may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses. That is why we ardently support ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine. To date, however, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition.

As a former police chief, I recognize we are not going to arrest our way out of the problem. We also recognize that legalizing marijuana would not provide the answer to any of the health, social, youth education, criminal justice, and community quality of life challenges associated with drug use.

That is why the President's National Drug Control Strategy is balanced and comprehensive, emphasizing prevention and treatment while at the same time supporting innovative law enforcement efforts that protect public safety and disrupt the supply of drugs entering our communities. Preventing drug use is the most cost-effective way to reduce drug use and its consequences in America. And, as we've seen in our work through community coalitions across the country, this approach works in making communities healthier and safer. We're also focused on expanding access to drug treatment for addicts. Treatment works. In fact, millions of Americans are in successful recovery for drug and alcoholism today. And through our work with innovative drug courts across the Nation, we are improving our criminal justice system to divert non-violent offenders into treatment.

Our commitment to a balanced approach to drug control is real. This last fiscal year alone, the Federal Government spent over $10 billion on drug education and treatment programs compared to just over $9 billion on drug related law enforcement in the U.S.

Thank you for making your voice heard. I encourage you to take a moment to read about the President's approach to drug control to learn more.

P1: maybe he should have fucking listened to the panel about cannabis Nixon appointed then dismissed then.

P2: yes, granted, cannabis has an addiction rate. Do you know what else does? Literally everyfuckingthing defined as a drug. Weed addiction is at about five percent. Alcoholism, double that.
Respiratory disease? Yeah no. A study funded by this very government debunked that shit, along with the "weed causes lung problems" argument (which I'll admit, even I was surprised when it was proven it doesn't).
Cognitive impairment? No shit Sherlock, it obviously disrupts people in the short-term. K the brain doesn't stop developing till the mid twenties. Seems like a pretty goddamn good reason to keep alcohol limited to the 21+ crowd, doesn't it? After all science shows it's way more mindfucking than weed. And gee it's a good thing every sane/major pro-weed lobbying group is pushing for weed to be a 21+ drug.
Potency? Yeah your own goddamn branch of government says the opposite. Pardon me for a moment.
THE FDA SAID PURE THC HAS AN EXCELLENT SAFETY RECORD. IN 1999
Ahem. Now where were we.
Voluntary drug treatment? Bullshit. Most of that is teenagers forced into rehab either by the courts or by intolerant parents who catch them lighting up. I've gotten what you might call "too high". People do not voluntarily go to rehab over that shit. They simply pass out (at one-fourteenth the LD50 by the way). Hell, my mother could tell you as much. She was an LCDC not all that long ago and very few were admitted to rehab for weed. The few that were basically ended up betrayed by relatives and shipped to her as a get out of jail in half a year card.
Visits to the ER? Also bullshit. I know what they base that statistic on- they drug test people who come into the ER for any reason, very often being involved in a traffic accident (whether perp or victim), and if THC is in their system they file it under "marijuana related". While completely disregarding for statistical purposes whether large amounts of alcohol are also in their blood (usually, yes). They then say the THC levels therefore mean they were high therefore mean weed caused ER visits, all the while implying weed is somehow inherently dangerous and completely raping the causal order in order to get the sort of statistics they desire.

P3: you know what? I agree. I absolutely agree. Why? Because smoked weed is far from the most efficient or safe delivery system for cannabiniods. Vaporized weed, on the other hand, is most efficient and bypasses the (still theoretical) harms smoking the herb creates. Doctors tend to highly recommend it. As for you wondering how I could agree with the second half, it's simple: neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine is going to find any good in weed because all US research has to be approved by NIDA, which has stated outright that they don't want to look at the positives.

P4: funny, every single shred of evidence that exists in the world refutes this (with the possibility of exactly one pro-medical weed state). Otherwise, all the pro-weed states, Holland, and Portugal disagree with you here. And granted, while none of these places are full legalization, they show a pretty damn clear trend that social costs go down when legal status goes up. Hell, if weed is such a menace, just try and find how much social harm it did all on its own while legal for all of mankind before the twentieth century- after all, the plant predates the existence of our species. Can't? Fascinating.
Quick aside: the opium wars in China were created because Britain had quite the thirst for tea and they needed to addict the population to something they'd consider valuable. If weed were anywhere near as addictive I'm pretty sure my history book would refer to this period as the cannabis wars.

P5: this is actually a pretty awesome idea! Reform addicts through rehab by treating a public health problem as an actual health problem. And stop murderous cartels from coming at us. It's just a damn shame how the government's working in cahoots with the Sinola cartel (which came into the mainstream news no less!) while denying the non-violent offenders the right to vote, get college grants Obama was fortunate enough not to need, or get a job as I've been increasingly noticing in job applications- they turn you down if you've been so much as arrested for anything ever. Diverting into treatment still means a damning rap sheet.
Yes, treatment works. Absolutely. Interesting how the tone shifts to all use/abuse in general here. Comprehensive reform says precisely dick here. I could argue for legalization of everything till my face turns blue but that's not the fucking issue, is it?

P6: oh, I really do hope you've turned the majority of funds to education. But considering all that I know about your policy on weed (including the actual budget adjustments the DEA has received) I'm not exactly holding my breath.

P7: suck my balls Holder, I encourage you to take a moment to listen to the voice of reason to find out why you shouldn't be sleeping soundly at night.


So yeah, you're pretty much right xmobotx. Most of it is "bullshit" sprinkled in with a bit of "so what?".
Edit: I showed this to a lovely Skype contact of mine and this was her reply: "that poor lad got pwned so hard, I do hope you know you caused a suicide". Oh, I do hope so.

 

[Hydro-Soil]

Wake up to the point that if I could go back I would choose John McCain? No.

Ahhh... no. Was meaning you'd woken to the point of realizing your 'vote' doesn't mean anything anymore.

We have no rights. They've been legislated away.

The only way to get them back is at gunpoint.

Smell the coffee yet?

 

[Tony Aroma]

And please remind me never to take Tony Aroma up on a formal bet.

Do I know my government or do I know my government!?!?!

But here's the thing. Even if everything the Drug Czar said is true, it still doesn't explain why making it illegal is the solution to any of those issues. I could understand wanting to control intestate commerce, as that's something the federal government can and should do. But to ruin someone's life over simple possession makes no sense. Especially if what the drug czar said is true.

So here's the question I think should be posed to the Drug Czar:

How does giving someone a permanent criminal record and preventing them from going to college benefit the individual or society?

 

[zenoonez]

Ahhh... no. Was meaning you'd woken to the point of realizing your 'vote' doesn't mean anything anymore.

We have no rights. They've been legislated away.

The only way to get them back is at gunpoint.

Smell the coffee yet?

I have no doubt that I am always voting for the lesser evil. That being said, I have not lost all faith in our democracy yet.

 

[Bacchus]

Do I know my government or do I know my government!?!?!

But here's the thing. Even if everything the Drug Czar said is true, it still doesn't explain why making it illegal is the solution to any of those issues. I could understand wanting to control intestate commerce, as that's something the federal government can and should do. But to ruin someone's life over simple possession makes no sense. Especially if what the drug czar said is true.

So here's the question I think should be posed to the Drug Czar:

How does giving someone a permanent criminal record and preventing them from going to college benefit the individual or society?

Well said. You can respond to their rebuttal. Wordsmith us a nice repsonse Tony and I will cut and paste it in.

 

[Preacher]

Do I know my government or do I know my government!?!?!

But here's the thing. Even if everything the Drug Czar said is true, it still doesn't explain why making it illegal is the solution to any of those issues. I could understand wanting to control intestate commerce, as that's something the federal government can and should do. But to ruin someone's life over simple possession makes no sense. Especially if what the drug czar said is true.

So here's the question I think should be posed to the Drug Czar:

How does giving someone a permanent criminal record and preventing them from going to college benefit the individual or society?

What law enforcement in general would say: something to the effect of being a deterrent for first-time use.

What they're actually thinking: "keeps them niggers from voting!"

 

[Tony Aroma]

Well said. You can respond to their rebuttal. Wordsmith us a nice repsonse Tony and I will cut and paste it in.

Thanks.

Not sure what you mean. Whose rebuttal can I respond to? What response should I wordsmith and where will you paste it?

 

[Bacchus]

At the end of the response we got from the White House there is a link for us to reply.

 

[smokefrogg]

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitio...gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Respond to each of the 7 marijuana related petitions individually instead of one canned response.

 

[Hydro-Soil]

That being said, I have not lost all faith in our democracy yet.

You've never wondered why you call it a democracy when it was supposed to be a republic? A republic which we've not managed to keep, I might add.

You have faith in a system you don't understand. What can I say?

Stay Safe!