Sent my State rep an email, He wrote back.

I can already assure he didn't write it, see it, or even knew you wrote him a letter. So a reply would just lead to another automated reply. But try man, it never hurts.

I believe driving high can be dumb, so you'd receive OUIs like drinking. Basically weed should be treated like alcohol, taxed like it and rules of abuse like it. Though the age should be 18.

Use it in the privacy of your home, or at designated areas. If you're high and can't pass a soberiety test given by an on-scene cop, you get an OUI. And if you're under the age and have it, you get a civil charge, that get's expunged at age 18.


Tell him that stuff...or...you're opinion of course.

 

I think:

1)Writing to state representatives is largely a waste of time because people have been writing their representatives for quite some time with meager/no gains.


2)The argument for medical marijuana is important, but the broader issue is one of human rights. I don't think it's beneficial for cannabis users to first argue for medical, and then 'play the system' or believe that the laws will become fair slowly. This is like Slaves arguing to first make it illegal to detain them, beat them, and restrain them, and eventually they will stop being treated as human farm equipment. If you cannot enjoy cannabis legally under the same circumstances that you can enjoy alcohol legally, you do not live in a free society. If you do choose to write to your representative, please let them know that you are concerned about constitutional rights.

 

Writing to our legislators is a numbers game. Each letter represents for them a percentage of their constituents. They may not reply to the letters themselves but they notice when the numbers go up.

It's important that we keep on writing. One letter won't change anything but keep writing and find ways to get other people writing in too. We've got to convince them that this is a big deal to a lot of people.

 

You're absolutely right about that, and I don't want people to stop writing, but if they could replace writing with a more active method of protest I would gladly accept the trade.

 

I've written mine a few times, but now he's put me on some email list where he sends me a few emails every couple weeks on forest fire protection and a bunch of other junk he's working on lol.

 

You should write back something like this.

"Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I also share your concerns, quantity is a difficult one to figure out. Cannabis has a very long "shelf life" if stored properly so we don't want to limit it to the point that a patient can not keep a lasting supply from either growing as nature allows or buying "in bulk" to save money. Restriction of location is also a difficult issue to tackle, must people equate intake with smoking, which gives off a strong odor, but there are other ways to ingest it such as eating food the thc has been baked into, pills, sprays, ect. Public consumption should not be outlawed, although I agree smoking should be unless the owner of the establishment allows it (such as compassion centers). But there should be some control on public smoke free use where needlessly drawing attention to what you are doing should not be tolerated."

If you are a DDUI state I would also make a point that it's an unjust unfair law, thc stays in your system much much longer than it is "active". That law needs to be changed before patients start getting targeted by rouge police officers who don't agree with the Medical law and take the matter into their own hands through technicallies like we have seen in other states.

 

For people who are truly truly sick and need it just to be functional like MS patients why shouldn't they be able to take a pill or suck on a piece of hard candy with with thc in it. Little kids aren't going to know they are high or getting high.

It's the same as if someone smoked a bowl at home then went to do whatever they needed to do that day.

Just because the public has been lied to and made to fear it for decades shouldn't mean these people shouldn't be allowed out in public when they want the relief from their medicine.

People are allowed to pop vicodin or oxy in public, where is the difference? As long as they aren't driving they are hurting no one by helping themselves.

 

Dude you just took exactly what I said and yelled it back at me like I'm wrong.

-Smoking in public bad, unless it is at a place like a compassion center that chooses to allow it.

- Other ways to ingesting it should be legal in public because people with serious medical needs shouldn't have to choose between being in anguish and "active" or medicated and confined to their home. That doesn't mean going to a playground and saying "Hey kid wanna brownie? haha too bad" But if someone is snacking on a firecracker or sucking on a thc infused piece of candy and it's allowing to be active instead of uncontrollably shaking at home then whats the problem. Go look up video on youtube of someone with MS and the difference after getting high.

- The last thing in my post was saying as long as they aren't driving. The type of patients I'm trying to look out for are the ones who are so bad they can't drive anyway. The driving issue is the serious one to me, because I see that as a big hurdle for the government allowing personal use for more than medical. There is no "breathalyzer" for cannabis that I know of at least. All they can see is if THC is present in your system, and some states like mine have laws on the books that will charge you with a ddui for that even if you aren't under the influence, even if you haven't smoked in a month as long as thc is in your system and they check you for it.

- I don't know what it's like where you live but people drink in public all the time around, most people just look the other way about it. Some of my favorites nights were walking home from the bar with my friends after grabbing a case out of someones trunk.

 

i'm pretty sure he was just clarifying that he only meant the smoking shouldn't be allowed in public. pretty much you guys are agreeing in a really odd way.

 

I know right. lol

Sorry dude maybe I read it a little wrong.

 

To the people who think writing your representatives is pointless you are very wrong. Although the reps probably will not do exactly what you ask them to or even read your email it still reaffirms three things to them and their staff. They are:
1. We are out there
2. We care about our cause
3. We are willing to take the time to speak out about our cause (this one is most important because the "stoner stereotype" is that we are too lazy to do anything besides eat Cheetos and watch John Stewart.)

Even if you don't get a response from your rep, you still put yourself out there and if everyone who cares about legalization did that it would have a profound effect. Take getting no response as an opportunity to send another email or letter and restate your feelings.

 

At this point, it truly doesn't matter what we do in regards to sending representatives emails and such. The revolution is already taking off. The majority of people have no idea how powerful cannabis as medicine is, and this revolution will truly be one of the greatest in mankind's history. The elimination of nearly all disease, revamping the economy and society with hemp... it will be great. If you are not familiar with cannabis and hemp oil being used to cure cancer and other serious diseases, check out PhoenixTears.ca. Cannabis could be legal by the year's end, but it is still going to take some major work in the next few months.

 

I agree while disagreeing.

Contacting reps is more important now than ever, even if they don't read them and it's interns replying back with form letters. At some point the rep will be told how many letters they have received in favor of the issues. If they have large numbers in favor of marijuana then it could sway them to vote for some of this legislation that is on the table.

I highly doubt it will be legal this year. However I think we can make great strides toward that this year, Possibly Federal level medical with a rescheduling and strides toward decriminalization for non medical use, which seems to be what they are slowly positioning toward with the not saying "war on drugs" and favoring treatment over incarceration. I know most people here reacted negatively to what the new drug czar had to say about it, but I believe it is a good thing and they are cautiously positioning themselves to be able to make it a "health care issue" not a criminal issue, which is a vague political way of saying decriminalization.

 

I had read that legislators count each letter as the opinion of about 10,000 people because so few folks actually do contact their reps.
With pot having been illegal for so many years it is politically astute to "ease" it back into society's mainstream. Pretty big risk for a politician to advocate a jump straight into full legalization. A good goal would first be to get medical mj legalized nationwide with state to state reciprocity. After the unenlightend come to see that society hasn't imploded from medical mj patients running amuck then they will be more likely to eventually support full legalization. Don't forget despite all the pro mj stuff being bandied about right now there are A LOT of people dead set against marijuana. Frankly I would be suprised to see it legal within 10 years. With our economy in the dumper and folk's investments having tanked, jobs & homes being lost right and left survival is paramount on most people's minds, not pot. The best thing we can do is act responsibly as mj users and write our congressmen.

 

Maybe you could write back and put in your 2 cents on some things he is concerned about.