Grow Weed Blog
Carl Olsen, August 5, 2008 Page 1 of 4
DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION Petition by Carl Olsen ) NOTICE AND DEADLINE TO for the rescheduling of marijuana ) CEASE AND DESIST ILLEGAL pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 811 ) ENFORCEMENT OF and 21 C.F.R. § 1308 ) FRAUDULANT MARIJUANA ) REGULATION August 5, 2008 Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration Department of Justice Washington, DC 20537 Re: Petition for Marijuana Rescheduling Dear Sir/Madam: You are hereby notified that the current scheduling of marijuana in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1308.11 Schedule I, is in violation of federal law, Title 21 United States Code, Section 903, and you must immediately cease and desist enforcement of the illegal regulation of marijuana until marijuana is correctly scheduled or removed from the schedules entirely. Failure of the Drug Enforcement Administration to cease and desist enforcement of the illegal regulation of marijuana within 30 days will result in a federal civil injunction being filed against the Drug Enforcement Carl Olsen, August 5, 2008 Page 2 of 4 Administration in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. MEMORANDUM OF LAW It is established federal law that the states, and not the federal government, determine accepted medical practice. Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006); 21 U.S.C. § 903. Twelve states have determined that marijuana has accepted medical use. Rescheduling of marijuana should have been automatically triggered in 1996 when California enacted the first state law accepting the medical use of marijuana. In Grinspoon v. DEA, 828 F.2d 881, 886 (1st Cir. 1987), the U.S. Court of Appeals told the DEA that a controlled substance cannot be scheduled in Schedule I if it has accepted medical use anywhere in the United States (". . . Congress did not intend 'accepted medical use in treatment in the United States' to require a finding of recognized medical use in every state . . ."), which proves the states, and not the federal government, determine accepted medical practice. In Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics v. DEA, 930 F.2d 936, 939 (D.C. Cir. 1991), the U.S. Court of Appeals told the DEA that there is no federal definition of "accepted medical use" (". . . neither the statute nor its legislative history precisely defines the term 'currently accepted medical Carl Olsen, August 5, 2008 Page 3 of 4 use' . . ."), which proves the states, and not the federal government, determine accepted medical practice. In United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 492 (2001), the U.S. Supreme Court told the DEA it could not put marijuana in Schedule I if marijuana had any accepted medical use: Schedule I is the most restrictive schedule (footnote omitted). The Attorney General can include a drug in schedule I only if the drug "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," "has a high potential for abuse," and has "a lack of accepted safety for use . . . under medical supervision." §§ 812(b)(1)(A)-(C). Under the statute, the Attorney General could not put marijuana into schedule I if marijuana had any accepted medical use. In Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that Congress put marijuana in Schedule I. But Schedule I is only the "initial" schedule for marijuana. Congress never said the initial schedules were permanent. 21 U.S.C. § 811(a) requires the DEA to "add to", "transfer between", or "remove" substances from the schedules as necessary. See 21 U.S.C. § 812(c) (". . . Initial schedules of controlled substances Schedules I, II, III, IV, and V shall, unless and until amended pursuant to section 811 of this title . . ."). Ms. Raich did not tell the DEA it could not put marijuana into schedule I, but the DEA should not have to be told that it must obey a federal law. The DEA should have rescheduled marijuana in 1996 and was legally obligated to do so at that time. Carl Olsen, August 5, 2008 Page 4 of 4 In Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006), the U.S. Supreme Court told the DEA that a federal interpretive rule cannot conflict with an accepted state medical practice. The DEA cannot create an administrative rule that conflicts with 21 U.S.C. § 903, and it cannot maintain an existing regulation that conflicts with 21 U.S.C. § 903. Marijuana, temporarily scheduled by Congress in 21 U.S.C. § 812, Schedule I(c)(10) in 1970, has been incorrectly classified in 21 C.F.R. § 1308.11(d)(22) since 1996 because it no longer fits the criteria for inclusion in Schedule I as set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(1)(A)-(C): Schedule I. - (A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. (B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. (C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision. Because marijuana has been incorrectly scheduled since 1996, the DEA must immediately cease and desist the enforcement of the illegal regulation of marijuana until the federal scheduling has been corrected. Respectfully yours, __________________________ Carl Olsen 130 E Aurora Ave Des Moines, IA 50313-3654 515-288-5798 Certified Mail Receipt No. 7006 2760 0004 2439 1694 And he lives Right in my neighborhood of several years past. Ah, how nice. You go, Carl. We are pulling for you.|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
| Â | |||||||||||
| Â | |||||||||||
| Â | |||||||||||
| Â | |||||||||||
|
*Therapeutic cannabis consultation and information provided by: Patients Out of Time Fish Pond Plantation, 1472 Fish Pond Road Howardsville, Virginia 24562 (434) 263-4484, FAX (434) 263-6753 E-mail: Patients@MedicalCannabis.com www.medicalcannabis.com I wish to thank the courageous forward thinking of the preceeding organizations for supporting the truth when it is not safe for their carreers nor finances. God Bless You!
Oh, and you, too, Dear Readers
Happy Trails |
|||||||||||
|
Cannabis-Linked Cell Receptor Might Help Prevent Colon Cancer
Findings may serve as new path for better treatment of disease, study suggests-- Robert Preidt |
content by:
SOURCE: University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, news release, Aug. 1, 2008
Copyright © 2008 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved. Ya know what I like? A great, scientific reason to legalize cannabis. Would that be because I just want to smoke a blunt? No, I fought off cancer and if we can really identify legitimate uses of cannabis it would be unlikely for the drug warrior morons, hicks and jackasses to have looked in this wonderful stash of God-given medicines so this is a whole new series of medicines to help us not have to live and die in agony from preventable cancer. In short, if they don't expect to find anything good and we are looking in that place instead of where schedule one says nothing can be found, then we are performing good science. It is good science to examine cannabis for medicinal effects. How would we know that? Well, we could start by examining the patent office where the good old federal USA has around 100 patents on file for medical marijuana Right Now. YEP, the federal drug warriors are completely lying hypocrits to be arresting sick little old ladies for growing pot in their own yards to stop dying in agony. I am a very serious Christian, but praying is not enough, my friends. We need to get out the vote. We need to read these blogs I am putting up for you and we need to back NORML. God bless your gardens
Washington, DC: Police arrested a record 829,625 persons for marijuana violations in 2006, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. This is the largest total number of annual arrests for pot ever recorded by the FBI. Marijuana arrests now comprise nearly 44 percent of all drug arrests in the United States.
"These numbers belie the myth that police do not target and arrest minor marijuana offenders," said NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre, who noted that at current rates, a marijuana smoker is arrested every 38 seconds in America. "This effort is a tremendous waste of criminal justice resources that diverts law enforcement personnel away from focusing on serious and violent crime, including the war on terrorism."
Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 89 percent, 738,915 Americans were charged with possession only. The remaining 90,710 individuals were charged with "sale/manufacture," a category that includes all cultivation offenses, even those where the marijuana was being grown for personal or medical use. In past years, roughly 30 percent of those arrested were age 19 or younger.
"Present policies have done little if anything to decrease marijuana's availability or dissuade youth from trying it," St. Pierre said, noting young people in the U.S. now frequently report that they have easier access to pot than alcohol or tobacco.
“Two other major points standout from today’s record marijuana arrests: Overall, there has been a dramatic 188 percent increase in marijuana arrests in the last 15 years -- yet the public's access to pot remains largely unfettered and the self-reported use of cannabis remains largely unchanged. Second, America’s Midwest is decidedly the hotbed for marijuana-related arrests with 57 percent of all marijuana-related arrests. The region of America with the least amount of marijuana-related arrests is the West with 30 percent. This latter result is arguably a testament to the passage of various state and local decriminalization efforts over the past several years.â€
The total number of marijuana arrests in the U.S. for 2006 far exceeded the total number of arrests in the U.S. for all violent crimes combined, including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.
Annual marijuana arrests have nearly tripled since the early 1990s.
"Arresting hundreds of thousands of Americans who smoke marijuana responsibly needlessly destroys the lives of otherwise law abiding citizens," St. Pierre said, adding that over 8 million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges in the past ten years. During this same time, arrests for cocaine and heroin have declined sharply, implying that increased enforcement of marijuana laws is being achieved at the expense of enforcing laws against the possession and trafficking of more dangerous drugs.
St. Pierre concluded: "Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers between $10 billion and $12 billion annually and has led to the arrest of nearly 20 million Americans. Nevertheless, some 94 million Americans acknowledge having used marijuana during their lives. It makes no sense to continue to treat nearly half of all Americans as criminals for their use of a substance that poses no greater - and arguably far fewer - health risks than alcohol or tobacco. A better and more sensible solution would be to tax and regulate cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol and tobacco."
| YEAR | MARIJUANA ARRESTS |
| 2006 | 829,625 |
| 2005 | 786,545 |
| 2004 | 771,608 |
| 2003 | 755,187 |
| 2002 | 697,082 |
| 2001 | 723,627 |
| 2000 | 734,498 |
| 1999 | 704,812 |
| 1998 | 682,885 |
| 1997 | 695,200 |
| 1996 | 641,642 |
| 1995 | 588,963 |
| 1994 | 499,122 |
| 1993 | 380,689 |
| 1992 | 342,314 |
| 1991 | 287,850 |
| 1990 | 326,850 |
| Hoffburg Palace area, downtown Vienna |
More Articles...
Page 9 of 10
