[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2017-04: Cannabis Resolution

Fri Feb 24 19:37:29 EST 2017

I generally do.  I am in regular contact with my states Sam as all of them
would attest. I would have to check my emails for December when this was
first proposed but I believe I did.  You should know me better than that -
I would guess I am in more regular contact with my Region than most.  They
hear from me about every two weeks on something and I personally call them
every three months.

I would ask similarly that At Large representatives find out in general if
the membership supports us making such resolutions.  I suspect they do.
And it isn't like we were all busy on the LNC-level doing something else.
The officers certainly were, and we are all busy in our home states, but a
glance at the list will show this is not taking away time from anything
else on the LNC-level.

The Alaska affiliate is not wasting our time. We signed up for this.  With
the honour, comes work.

-Caryn Ann

-Caryn Ann

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 5:25 PM Sam Goldstein <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I abstain on this motion.
>
> And to further Alicia's discussion, I would ask consideration of those who
> would put forward
> resolutions that take up valuable time and energy that could be better
> used for a very wide
> variety of LP projects.  If you are a Regional Rep, at least get consensus
> from a majority of
> your states chairs before floating a motion/resolution.
>
>
>
> Sam Goldstein
> Libertarian National Committee
> Member at Large
> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
> Indianapolis IN 46260
> 317-850-0726 Phone
> 317-582-1773 Fax
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> Dan,
>
> LOL at your story!   :-)  But I see a different lesson to be drawn here.
>
> First of all, it *IS* okay for "a random dude in a Lyft" to ask his
> driver to sell him some marijuana!  Asking is free speech. It is not
> insulting or offensive. As Libertarians, we believe everyone should have
> the right to request such a transaction, and that if buyer and seller are
> in agreement, it should be allowed to take place without any interference
> from government.
>
> Selling it to him is not technically illegal, either, regardless of what
> the U.S. federal government or Louisiana state government may say. The U.S.
> Constitution does not authorize Congress to make any laws banning or
> regulating the sale of substances such as cannabis, and the 9th and 10th
> Amendments makes clear that the people possess rights not listed in the
> Constitution, and that powers not listed in the Constitution are reserved
> to the state governments or to the people. The 14th Amendment further
> establishes that not just the federal government, but the state governments
> as well, are forbidden from infringing on these rights: "No state shall
> make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
> citizens of the United States." So unless a seller of marijuana is not a
> U.S. citizen, any Louisiana statutes criminalizing that sale are also
> unconstitutional and therefore illegal.
>
> Quite possibly the reason the gentleman asked you about Trump is because
> he wouldn't have wanted to ask an anti-cannabis conservative who might take
> an offer to buy cannabis badly. The fact that you being a Libertarian made
> your passenger feel safe enough with you to trust you in making a request
> which could get him in trouble with government authorities is a *victory* for
> us! It is the reward we've reaped from our history of being outspoken
> opponents of the "War on Drugs". If members of the public trust Libertarian
> Party leaders, that's a *good* thing (to the extent we *are* trustworthy
> and they aren't being misled, but that's a separate matter; in this case, I
> don't think the trust was misplaced, as whether you liked the guy or not,
> I'm sure you didn't go and report him to the authorities). If they trust
> us, they are more likely to vote for our candidates, donate money to our
> party, etc.
>
> Hypothetically speaking, say that your passenger had just happened to read
> in some media outlet somewhere that the LNC had just rejected a resolution
> in favor of legalizing and de-scheduling marijuana. Do you think he would
> have felt as trusting of you, and as safe in asking you to sell him some
> weed? Do you think he would have been as likely to vote for the next
> Libertarian candidates he might see on his ballot?
>
> Passing this resolution is an opportunity to keep our opposition to the
> modern Prohibition fresh in the public's consciousness, and to continue to
> earn their trust. Rejecting it risks sending a mixed message and
> undermining that trust. I encourage you to reconsider your abstention and
> vote yes.
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
>                                    ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>                                 (415) 625-FREE
>                                   @StarchildSF
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Daniel Hayes wrote:
>
> I abstain.
>
> Just last night it was "driven" home to me just how little this is needed
> from the LNC.  I drive Lyft occasionally. Its Mardi Gras, and I was driving
> Lyft last night.
>
> This one passenger that made me wait a while and was kind of "triggering"
> me said to me while driving, "You look like a Trump man."
> I looked at him sideways and grabbed my phone and showed him the LP site.
> He saw LP and said "Oh! you are a LIbertarian, I voted for Gary Johnson."
> I then showed him the LNC, and he saw my picture and said, "Oh! you are on
> the National Committee. Can you sell me some weed?"
>
> Now I don't smoke, use, or sell weed so I couldn't help him though I fully
> support the reform of cannabis laws.  I didn't really like him so I
> probably wouldn't have sold him any even if I had some and even if it were
> not illegal to do so.
>
> The point of this story is everybody knows where we stand on cannabis. I
> was already thinking that before this incident last night.
>
> It's still kinda long and preachy and we have been proselytizing  this
> since 1971.  When a random dude in a Lyft automatically thinks it's ok to
> ask his driver to buy some weed BECAUSE he is on the Libertarian National
> Committee, I think this motion is redundant.
>
> Hence my abstention.
>
>
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC At Large Member
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2017, at 4:21 PM, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Yes
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David
>
>
>
> *2017 Omaha Libertarian Strategy Un-Convention*
>
>
>
> *Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High and LIVE FREE*
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative
>
> Secretary, LPNE State Central Committee
>
> Cell:      402-981-6469 <(402)%20981-6469>
>
> Home: 402-493-0873 <(402)%20493-0873>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org
> <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org>] *On Behalf Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
> *Sent:* Friday, February 24, 2017 4:18 PM
> *To:* Libertarian National Committee list <lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2017-04: Cannabis Resolution
>
>
>
> Yes
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> We have an electronic mail ballot.
>
>
>
> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by March 6, 2017 at 11:59:59pm
> Pacific time.*
> *Co-Sponsors:*  Harlos, Demarest, Starchild, Redpath
>
> *Motion:*
>
> WHEREAS the current federal classification of cannabis under the
> Controlled Substances Act as a Schedule 1 drug having no medicinal value is
> an inaccurate classification at odds with the findings of the National
> Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine and those of many other
> researchers; and
>
> WHEREAS this dishonest classification is an impediment both to useful
> academic research, and to realizing the economic benefits that legalization
> offers; and
>
> WHEREAS cannabis is a drug with few harmful effects and zero documented
> fatalities which is even safer when not forced into the black market, where
> labeling, testing, and quality control are less prevalent; and
>
> WHEREAS drug prohibition in the United States has been an unmitigated
> failure, with a third of Americans self-reporting having used cannabis
> despite strict penalties against its sale, manufacture and use, and over $1
> trillion of taxpayer money in a futile effort to enforce drug laws,
> including those pertaining to cannabis; and
>
> WHEREAS the black markets created by these unconstitutional statutes have
> led to increased violence both in the United States and in other countries
> such as Mexico where cannabis and other drugs are produced for the U.S.
> market; and
>
> WHEREAS millions and millions of peaceful Americans have been arrested,
> imprisoned, fined, or otherwise needlessly criminalized and stigmatized,
> potentially for life, because of their use of cannabis, and the 2 million
> Drug War prisoners currently behind bars in the United States have given
> this country the highest documented incarceration rate of any nation on
> Earth, accounting for a reported 25% the world’s prisoners; and
>
> WHEREAS drug prohibition has been the major driver of the practice of
> asset forfeiture, in which over $13 billion has been seized by law
> enforcement across the country, often from people who have not been
> convicted of, or sometimes even charged with, any crime; and
>
> WHEREAS this gross violation of legal due process, has incentivized the
> arbitrary and often discriminatory arrest of U.S. residents in what has
> come to be known as "policing for profit" ; and
>
> WHEREAS unconstitutional statutes attempting to control what people choose
> to put into their own bodies constitute a vast and dangerous government
> intervention into people's personal lives violating the cherished American
> values of individual freedom and choice; and
>
> WHEREAS polls now show that most Americans support legalizing cannabis for
> both medical and recreational use, and voters in multiple states have voted
> accordingly;
>
> NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee
> supports the immediate full legalization and federal de-scheduling of
> cannabis and industrial hemp products, as a much-needed first step toward
> ending the destructive "War on Drugs" entirely, in accord with the
> Libertarian Party's platform.
>
>
> -Alicia
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <Untitled attachment 00624.txt>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170225/ad3b15d9/attachment-0002.html>