The REAL reason why maryjane is illegal!

[Montyz]

Originally Posted by gameova23

First of all that made alot of sense if you really think about it.
Second of all, if you say they can tax it, why haven't they huh. Give me some info to that.
Ohh wait now i remember its because they CANT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Marihuana_Tax_Act

Right around that time reefer madness kicked in and all the old bastard politicians are born around that time as well. That's the way they were raised.

[t.burninator]

sooo.....





You want the real reason cannabis is illegal? The no-bs, here's exactly how it happened, nobody-can-argue-with-this reason hemp is illegal? Well here it is:



http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm


The History of the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in the United States
by Charles Whitebread, Professor of Law, USC Law School
A Speech to the California Judges Association 1995 annual conference




here's the introduction:

Introduction

This session is going to be about the history of the non-medical use of drugs. Let me say that, because this is going to be a story, that I think it will interest you quite a bit. The topic is the history of the non-medical use of drugs and I think you ought to know what my credentials are for talking about this topic. As you may know, before I taught at the University of Southern California, I taught at the University of Virginia for fifteen years, from 1968 to 1981. In that time period, the very first major piece that I wrote was a piece entitled, "The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge - The Legal History of Marihuana in the United States". I wrote it with Professor Richard Bonnie, still of the faculty of the University of Virginia. It was published in the Virginia Law Review in October of 1970 and I must say that our piece was the Virginia Law Review in October of 1970. The piece was 450 pages long. It got a ton of national attention because no one had ever done the legal history of marijuana before. As a result of that, Professor Bonnie was named the Deputy Director of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse and I was a consultant to that commission.

As a result of Richard's two year executive directorship of the National Commission in 1971 and 1972 he and I were given access to both the open and the closed files of what was then called the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, what had historically been called the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and what today is called the Drug Enforcement Agency. Based upon our access to those files, both open and closed, we wrote a book called "The Marihuana Conviction- The Legal History of Drugs in the United States" and that book went through six printings at the University of Virginia press before being sold out primarily in sales to my friends at the FBI over the years. It is based upon that work that I bring you this story.




now go read the whole thing.
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

[Marymama]

Off to read...

[gameova23]

Here we go, to end this discussion for once.
Tax is not THE reason weed became illegal. It's the main reason its REMAINED and STAYED illegal to this day. It's been 71 years since weed has been illegal. People in office then who made quotes like"Smoke a joint and youll kill your brother". They've all died.
The government doesen't want to make weed legal. They just want some profit from DRUG DEALS i.e me meeting up with you. Im saying that the government wants a piece of that 100$ i gave for 10 grams. THEYRE NOT I REPEAT not gonna find a way to make money from that. THATS THEY ONLY WAY IT WILL BECOME LEGAL. the government isn't going to become the new Amsterdam sorry its not happening. You say we need new blood in Office i believed that at first, but then realized we'd be fucking lucky if NEW officials even THOUGHT of decriminalizing it, forget about legalizing it. If the government can find a way to make a profit from when my dealer meets up with me, THEN AND ONLY then it will become legal.

Now maybe that will bring a few insights upon people. But im not trying to bitch you guys out or hate you im just trying you guys to see where im coming from.

I think that we need some more time for people to come in this thread and state their opinion and read this and see what they say. We'll see what other people have to say.

Then again Ive been awake fpr 20 hours straight and my mind isn't working all that well.

[Bronxxballa]

you know what i say ?
we all run for office
and whoever gets it
legalizes weed .

take that, fat greedy old guys !

[Montyz]

Originally Posted by gameova23

Here we go, to end this discussion for once.
Tax is not THE reason weed became illegal. It's the main reason its REMAINED and STAYED illegal to this day. It's been 71 years since weed has been illegal. People in office then who made quotes like"Smoke a joint and youll kill your brother". They've all died.
The government doesen't want to make weed legal. They just want some profit from DRUG DEALS i.e me meeting up with you. Im saying that the government wants a piece of that 100$ i gave for 10 grams. THEYRE NOT I REPEAT not gonna find a way to make money from that. THATS THEY ONLY WAY IT WILL BECOME LEGAL. the government isn't going to become the new Amsterdam sorry its not happening. You say we need new blood in Office i believed that at first, but then realized we'd be fucking lucky if NEW officials even THOUGHT of decriminalizing it, forget about legalizing it. If the government can find a way to make a profit from when my dealer meets up with me, THEN AND ONLY then it will become legal.

Now maybe that will bring a few insights upon people. But im not trying to bitch you guys out or hate you im just trying you guys to see where im coming from.

I think that we need some more time for people to come in this thread and state their opinion and read this and see what they say. We'll see what other people have to say.

Then again Ive been awake fpr 20 hours straight and my mind isn't working all that well.

You see, now you're just acting dumb and loud.

[gameova23]

Originally Posted by Bronxxballa

you know what i say ?
we all run for office
and whoever gets it
legalizes weed .

take that, fat greedy old guys !

wordd to that son.

i would make grasscity a website that all schools taught about!
haha dude that would fucking awsome

[gameova23]

Originally Posted by Montyz

You see, now you're just acting dumb and loud.

uhh more arguments.

May i ask how.

You people say it makes no sense.

Sooooooooooooo.......................
i try to make it more understandable than it already is.

[Montyz]

Originally Posted by gameova23

uhh more arguments.

May i ask how.

You people say it makes no sense.

Sooooooooooooo.......................
i try to make it more understandable than it already is.

But you keep saying it can't be taxed, it CAN be taxed. There isn't some divine law where Cannabis can't be taxed. It's no different than anything else.

[gameova23]

Originally Posted by Montyz

But you keep saying it can't be taxed, it CAN be taxed. There isn't some divine law where Cannabis can't be taxed. It's no different than anything else.

When i say taxed.
I dont mean open shops in walmart.
I mean they want the money that people make from drug deals.
Does that make sense?

Yeah they can open walmarts. Is that gonna happen. No.
Can they make profit from drug deals outside of walmarts. No

They would make it legal if they could somehow make a profit from drug deals. Not walmarts because the government wouldnt do that.

Thats why i talk about ciggarretts because its a billion dollar industry. You can go to walmart yes. Its taxed yes. Millions of people die from them yes. Then why dont they illegalize tobacco. Because they make alot of money from it.

Now if that didn't make sense
Your probably just fuckin baked
No offense or anything

[TToken]

theres abit more to it than that my friend, check out The emperor wears no clothes- by jack herer for the politices behind why its illegal

here check this out http://www.canorml.org/background/CA_legalization.html

[TToken]

http://www.laist.com/2008/06/30/cali..._for_eve_1.php

[Marymama]

Great article, I had never read one so in depth.

The people who were raised with the reefer madness mentality are absolutely still in control.

We already have many states that have decriminalized marijuana, I say give it another 20 years and we will be smoking legally. I do not think dealers will be around though, marijuana will be sold and taxed the same as alcohol.

Interesting about the prohibition on cigarettes, I can see that happening.

[Marymama]

Oh and the man is making money off your pot deals. Watch those videos I linked to. For every drug dealer that's thrown in jail, the man makes money off of. Same difference.

[t.burninator]

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

Let me pause to tell you this. When Professor Bonnie and I set out to try to track the legal history of marijuana in this country, we were shocked that nobody had ever done that work before. And, secondly, the few people who had even conjectured about it went back to the 1937 Federal Act and said "Well, there's the beginning of it." No. If you go back to 1937, that fails to take account of the fact that, in the period from 1915 to 1937, some 27 states passed criminal laws against the use of marijuana. What Professor Bonnie and I did was, unique to our work, to go back to the legislative records in those states and back to the newspapers in the state capitols at the time these laws were passed to try to find out what motivated these 27 states to enact criminal laws against the use of marijuana. What we found was that the 27 states divided into three groups by explanation.

The first group of states to have marijuana laws in that part of the century were Rocky Mountain and southwestern states. By that, I mean Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Montana. You didn't have to go anywhere but to the legislative records to find out what had motivated those marijuana laws. The only thing you need to know to understand the early marijuana laws in the southwest and Rocky Mountain areas of this country is to know, that in the period just after 1914, into all of those areas was a substantial migration of Mexicans. They had come across the border in search of better economic conditions, they worked heavily as rural laborers, beet field workers, cotton pickers, things of that sort. And with them, they had brought marijuana.

Basically, none of the white people in these states knew anything about marijuana, and I make a distinction between white people and Mexicans to reflect a distinction that any legislator in one of these states at the time would have made. And all you had to do to find out what motivated the marijuana laws in the Rocky mountain and southwestern states was to go to the legislative records themselves. Probably the best single statement was the statement of a proponent of Texas first marijuana law. He said on the floor of the Texas Senate, and I quote, "All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff (referring to marijuana) is what makes them crazy." Or, as the proponent of Montana's first marijuana law said, (and imagine this on the floor of the state legislature) and I quote, "Give one of these Mexican beet field workers a couple of puffs on a marijuana cigarette and he thinks he is in the bullring at Barcelona."

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

Now, in doing this one at the FBI Academy, I didn't tell them this story, but I am going to tell you this story. You want to know how brief the hearings were on the national marijuana prohibition?

When we asked at the Library of Congress for a copy of the [Marihuana Tax Act of 1937] hearings, to the shock of the Library of Congress, none could be found. We went "What?" It took them four months to finally honor our request because -- are you ready for this? -- the hearings were so brief that the volume had slid down inside the side shelf of the bookcase and was so thin it had slid right down to the bottom inside the bookshelf. That's how brief they were. Are you ready for this? They had to break the bookshelf open because it had slid down inside.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

The entire debate on the national marijuana prohibition was as follows -- and, by the way, if you had grown up in Washington, DC as I had you would appreciate this date. Are you ready? The bill was brought on to the floor of the House of Representatives -- there never was any Senate debate on it not one word -- 5:45 Friday afternoon, August 20. Now, in pre-air-conditioning Washington, who was on the floor of the House? Who was on the floor of the House? Not very many people.

Speaker Sam Rayburn called for the bill to be passed on "tellers". Does everyone know "tellers"? Did you know that for the vast bulk of legislation in this country, there is not a recorded vote. It is simply, more people walk past this point than walk past that point and it passes -- it's called "tellers". They were getting ready to pass this thing on tellers without discussion and without a recorded vote when one of the few Republicans left in Congress, a guy from upstate New York, stood up and asked two questions, which constituted the entire debate on the national marijuana prohibition.

"Mr. Speaker, what is this bill about?"

To which Speaker Rayburn replied, "I don't know. It has something to do with a thing called marihuana. I think it's a narcotic of some kind."

Undaunted, the guy from Upstate New York asked a second question, which was as important to the Republicans as it was unimportant to the Democrats. "Mr. Speaker, does the American Medical Association support this bill?"

In one of the most remarkable things I have ever found in any research, a guy who was on the committee, and who later went on to become a Supreme Court Justice, stood up and -- do you remember? The AMA guy was named William C. Woodward -- a member of the committee who had supported the bill leaped to his feet and he said, "Their Doctor Wentworth came down here. They support this bill 100 percent." It wasn't true, but it was good enough for the Republicans. They sat down and the bill passed on tellers, without a recorded vote.

In the Senate there never was any debate or a recorded vote, and the bill went to President Roosevelt's desk and he signed it and we had the national marijuana prohibition.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

"Dear Agent so-and-so,

Glad to hear you are working hard to give effect to my directive of October 24, 1947. We will (and he always underlined the word 'will') have a great national round-up arrest of musicians in violation of the marijuana laws all on a single day. Don't worry, I will let you know what day."

This went on -- and, of course, you know that some jazz musicians were, in fact, arrested in the late 40's -- this all went on until it ended just the way it began -- with something that Anslinger said. I don't see anybody in here really old enough to appreciate this point, but Commissioner Anslinger was testifying before a Senate Committee in 1948. He was saying, "I need more agents." And, of course, the Senators asked him why.

"Because there are people out there violating the marijuana laws."

Well, you know what the Senators asked -- "Who?"

And in a moment that every Government employee should avoid like the plague, Anslinger first said, "Musicians." But then he looked up at that Senate committee and he gave them a little piece of his heart and said the single line which provoked the most response in this country's history about the non-medical use of drugs. Anslinger said, "And I don't mean good musicians, I mean jazz musicians."

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

You know what the women testified? In Newark they testified, and I quote, "After two puffs on a marijuana cigarette my incisor teeth grew six inches long and dripped with blood."

This was the craziest business you ever saw. Every one of these so-called marijuana insanity defenses were successful.

The one in New York was just outlandish. Two police officers were shot and killed in cold blood. The defendant puts on the marijuana insanity defense and, in that case, there was never even any testimony that the defendant had even used marijuana. The testimony in the New York case was that, from the time the bag of marijuana came into his room it gave off "homicidal vibrations", so he started killing dogs, cats, and ultimately two police officers.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm