Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

PM MP

with 24 comments

Originally Published In Homegrown Outlaw's Blog

By Jason Reed

To all that support change in current policy, I invite you to take part in: PM MP.

What is PM MP?  Well, I am hosting a letter that I am encouraging as many people as possible to post one copy to the Prime Minister, and one copy to your MP.  It is through weight and numbers that points are grasped and policy changed.

It is also worth sending to the Home Secretary – Theresa May, and James Brokenshire – Minister for Crime Prevention at the Home Office.

If you would like to add your name and address so as to receive a reply, all the better.  If you wish to remain anonymous, then that’s also fine, but please do take the time to send just two letters to the Prime Minister and your MP at this address:

Prime Minister,
10 Downing Street,
London, SW1A 2AA

Your MP can be found here:

They Work For You

And your MP’s address will be:

MP’s NAME, or James Brokenshire, or The Home Secretary Theresa May
House of Commons,
London SW1A OAA

Below you can find the template letter that has been created to address the current law & policy that surrounds cannabis in Britain.  It is with a great deal of thanks to the Drug Equality Alliance for directing the wording to address this issue correctly.

Please do support this; please send the letters.  Fellow bloggers, please also host the letter and send forth.

Either copy & paste the below text into a letter, or I have provided downloadable links at the end of this blog post.  Thank you all. Jason.

Dear

I am writing to state my view that continuing prohibition of all private interests in cannabis is not in the best interest of society or the individual. Current policy is in many regards counter-productive and a drain on the country’s resources.  The administration of Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 is mandated to be under constant review & evidence based; it’s concern is solely to reduce social harm caused by drug misuse.  I submit that there can be no justification in law for the blanket ban on accessing a substance that many persons use responsibly, and many use to experience the amelioration of symptoms caused by various medical disorders.

The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 seeks to regulate human action re any harmful drug, it does not provide a mandate for prohibition, indeed when one examines the obligations of the ACMD one can see that the law seeks to make arrangements for the supply of controlled drugs.  The legislative aim is to control responsible human action and property interests through the regulation of the production, distribution and possession of any harmful drug; this being proportionate and targeted to address the mischief of social harm occasioned by misuse.  I note that the law does not prohibit the use of cannabis at all, and this often ignored fact was Parliament’s way of opening the door to facilitate a suitable and rational regulatory structure.  I place it on record that I wish the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 to be used properly, and neutrally; specifically; (under Section 1) – “(2) (a) for restricting the availability of such drugs or supervising the arrangements for their supply.

The prohibition of all private interests in cannabis & the denial of the possibility of responsible use has failed:

  • The estimated expenditure of £19 billion on the judicial ‘controls’ over UK drug policy is a large sum that cannot be justified in the current fiscal climate.  I do not believe it can be proven to be a valid policy even if the nation could easily afford it; it has a high price on liberty, and a paradoxical effect upon the health of all drug users – it has proved futile in almost every way, save for the government’s blind adherence to the international treaties it chooses to fetter it’s discretion to.
  • There is an estimated street value of £5 billion profit going directly to gangs and cartels, and this in turn funds organised crime, human trafficking, and all manner of hard-line criminality.
  • Children have easy & ready access to cannabis.  Children are dealing cannabis and using cannabis with relative ease.
  • There is an estimated 165 million responsible and non-problematic cannabis users worldwide.  There is anything from 2 – 10 million adult users in the UK.  There is no societal benefit to criminalising such a large portion of society, these are generally law-abiding persons who wish to use a substance that is comparatively safer than many drugs that government choose to exclude users of from the operation of the MoDA 1971 (despite the Act being neutral as to what drug misusers are controlled, the most harmful drugs such as alcohol and tobacco are excluded by policy, but this is not reflected in the Act itself).
  • Under prohibition, as in 1920’s America, quality control has suffered giving way to hastily harvested cannabis which acts as the modern day equivalent of the infamous Moonshine & Hooch. The UK media terms this bad product simply as “Skunk”. Cannabis is now being cut with harmful drugs, glass, metal fillings, and chemicals to give false potency, and to add weight for profit motivations.
  • To criminalise personal actions that do not harm others within the confines of privately owned property is at best draconian, and at worst futile & irresponsible.

I wish to encourage the adoption of a regulatory system that provides:

  • An age-check system to prevent the young and vulnerable from obtaining cannabis with the ease they currently have.
  • The partial saving from the £19 billion drug enforcement budget, alongside the estimated street worth of £5 billion potentially collected from cannabis.  This would be a considerable sum in aiding the country in fiscal crisis.
  • Quality control that can be accorded to cannabis production and sale, thus ensuring that there are no dangerous impurities and that the correct balance of cannabinoids are present (according to the needs of the user) to minimise potential harms.
  • Potency & harm reduction information can be provided to adults, ensuring education is the forefront of the regulatory model.
  • A restriction on marketing and the creation of designated discreet outlets. As seen in many countries, given a place of legitimacy, the cache of cannabis is lessened in favour of responsibility.
  • The freedoms and rights for non-problematic users to be respected.

I do hope that you will give this matter the urgent attention it warrants.

Yours


File Links:
PDF Immediate Download
PDF Download Prompt
Word Doc Immediate Download
Word Doc Download Prompt
Works wps Immediate Download
Works wps Download Prompt
TEXT Immediate Download
TEXT Download Prompt
Advertisements

24 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. there is only one thing i would point out in this were did the market value of cannabis come from?
    as the market price quoted in the letter is identical to 2002 and according to estimates in current price its probably double that if not triple that now given that cannabis use has not changed over the decade significantly enough to lower the figure.

    Gram for gram if the current use has remained the same the market value must have increased.

    John Ellis

    February 9, 2011 at 7:01 pm

  2. Thanks so much Peter! Your web traffic is much needed to this. I hope all Peter readers can lend support for the cause – this is affecting of us all, if you have children, they are currently in the lions den. This is the part that scares me specifically.

    John, I got the £5billion from the Green Party’s manifesto from this year’s General Election, and I think Beckely also make a conservative estimate of that too. I wonder if the IDMU have a better figure? It is a nigh on impossible one to fathom really isn’t it? It certainly runs into billions, that we can be assured of.

  3. Great work Jason. Thanks for posting this Peter.

    You can also use http://www.writetothem.com/, to contact your MP. Although I’m going to use the royal mail to contact the PM and my MP.

    Hopefully this will takeoff and MP’s around the land will be bombarded with these letters, and they won’t be able to ignore it anymore.

    Bob

    February 9, 2011 at 7:20 pm

  4. Could be walking in to a self made trap here by giving away your identity and address: The thought Police are ready and waiting to break-down your door and charge you with possession.

    The Debt Collector

    February 9, 2011 at 7:39 pm

    • They send me replys its one of those things I belive that once entered into this dialog its bad sportmanship and whole heartedly discriminatory for them to harras one, it certainly would not look to good in a court.

      Busted for asking about a shite drugs policey…

      John Ellis

      February 9, 2011 at 8:24 pm

      • That wouldn’t be relevant in the end, yes that’s how they found out, but the court wouldn’t be concerned about that unless it was related to the evidence and charges – it’s that someone is busted for possessing, supplying, cultivating, production, permitting premises etc and unless you can prove real discrimination, bad sportmanship is part of the game.

        Darryl Bickler

        February 9, 2011 at 9:26 pm

      • prob not but worth a try 😀

        i sent a petition for a grow room once 6*4 foot with 6 plants in flower 6 in veg and 12 cuttings.

        surprised they didn’t knock on the door for that one 🙂

        John Ellis

        February 9, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    • I stand proud for what I believe in.

      Here I am.

      This is me.

      Peter Reynolds

      February 9, 2011 at 8:44 pm

      • You don’t fear arrest?

        Darryl Bickler

        February 9, 2011 at 9:15 pm

      • I think you just have to look at it as an ocupational hazzard bust is bust it has to happen at some point in ones life. Ill make a lot of noise before then 🙂 and stay firmly in the public areana.

        John Ellis

        February 9, 2011 at 9:47 pm

      • “Fear” – what does that mean? I certainly wouldn’t like it but I’m not going to compromise my principles or freedom of expression. Anything I might do is entirely within the privacy of my own home and doesn’t involve anyone else. If they want to come and get me for that, I’m not hiding.

        Peter Reynolds

        February 9, 2011 at 10:05 pm

      • I think for many people the fear of police harassment in your home, disrupting family life, ruining careers, arrest, detention, questionning, advsers publicity is real. For you to pretend it’s not there is entirely non-empathic of you. Don’t joke about this, that you have no fear, you are no different to us, are you?. Fear of arrest spoils the experience Peter, you know how cannabis smells so strong, when you spark up a spliff then I guess the smell can draw attention , that meets with disaproval and then the smoker gets anxious, that’s part of the link with psychosis. The police are effectively in the mind space creating fear and mistrust. If you think the police don’t notice you posting pictures of your stash on FB, well for your sake I hope you’re mistaken. If you were busted, what approach would you take, perhaps turn misfortune into opportunity perhaps?

        Darryl Bickler

        February 9, 2011 at 10:57 pm

      • I try to meet with all of life’s challenges in that way Darryl. I am not joking at all. I enjoy the smell and I’m proud to enjoy it.

        Try it my way. You might find it works.

        Peter Reynolds

        February 9, 2011 at 11:28 pm

      • Maybe you’re speaking from a position of relative economic comfort, Peter?

        I don’t know if you have a mortgage, and a 9-5 job to service it, but I know that I would feel less of a victim of the law if I knew that, were I to get bust, I wouldn’t end up on the street (after I came out of prison, possibly).

        As my employment is subject to CRB checking, this would add to my woes.

        Before reclassification, when we were getting up our hopes, I wrote to politicians using my real name, but I will send Jason’s letter to the PM and my MP anonymously.

        pjmcneill

        February 10, 2011 at 12:09 am

      • The one thing that would desperately frighten me is what would happen to my dogs? Other than that, let them try! I’ll be out on bail within a few hours and I don’t do or have anything that warrants a custodial sentence.

        They’ll just embarrass themselves because, believe me, I’ll make a meal out of it – a banquet in fact.

        Peter Reynolds

        February 10, 2011 at 12:38 am

      • Some people say to bust an activist could be an own goal for the prohibitionists. I wasn’t saying you should walk in fear, and if you refuse to be, are out and proud and let it be known you smoke, well I respect that. Please recognise that what discrimination really means though is the difficulty it presents to people being that way. It is an attack on their way of being, I don’t know of anyone who feels free to use cannabis in any place they see people with cigarettes for example. I guess there is a balance between being “in your face” and being discrete. Personally I generally avoid controlled drugs because I feel the experience is compromised, and my physical and mental integrity compromised by the legal status.

        Darryl Bickler

        February 10, 2011 at 8:30 am

      • BTW – could you think about this banquet? Would it be publicity based? Would you plead not guilty? What defence would you use?

        Darryl Bickler

        February 10, 2011 at 8:31 am

  5. Jason I did the working out the year before by dividing the current net value with the current price per ounce and then recalculated the market price it added 5 billion to the existing 4.5 billion.
    I used the 2007 ACMD estimation..
    Seems the market may be greatly undervalued by the awarness groups.

    2007 was when cannabis was also at its cheapest levels with £70 to £90 for green being the average price range and £35-£50 for soap. Now £200-£250 for green and soap well almost none existant but generaly when i come across it £4 a gram.

    Im not picking at it just seems a bit odd that there has been no rise in the market value even though the price has more than doubled.

    John Ellis

    February 9, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    • The liberty/equality argument is yet more important than the economic card. It’s about what is right and wrong. It’s wrong to invade people’s privacy, their bodies and minds. This ruins much of the benefits they could otherwise experience with drugs.

      Darryl Bickler

      February 9, 2011 at 9:23 pm

      • yup totaly agree Darryl but the public understand the money better, we laymen know what is realy important.
        its like which sounds bigger and looks a larger sum
        yayda yayda £4.5 billion yayda yayda
        or
        yayda yayda £4.500.000.000 yayda yayda
        (the brain pauses makes you stop and count)

        also i belive the government plays down the figures as it makes it look a lesser problem when talking to the public. as i said wasn’t picking at an exelent peice of work just seemed strange the estimated figure only being 500k more than the 2007 figure.

        John Ellis

        February 9, 2011 at 9:39 pm

  6. I ran into that “Armband Proposal” thing on causes.com lately and it seemed like a good idea. The guy acts up though sending rants about how people won’t copy to their FB “friends” and generally acting the martinet.

    It still seems a good idea though making some kind of public gesture and encourage other people to express solidarity even if they are not smokers – even if only from the civil liberties point of view.

    If it could be done on April 20 it might even draw public attention to the LCA becoming once again a political party, as well as doing the PMMP thing –
    which is great as long as everyone prints the letter and sends it by post!! (Greatest nuisance value).

    They can’t arrest everyone for displaying a cannabis leaf somewhere. If they use stop and search measures to take your name and address just because you were wearing a leaf that would be politically very interesting, too.

    Tim Kendall

    February 10, 2011 at 2:24 am

  7. Great stuff Jason.

    Until that day – Live like its legal!

    No fear…

    Architect

    February 10, 2011 at 11:31 am

  8. Thank you Jason, I will get my letters off. Its interesting to read this ‘fear of arrest v freedom to express our opinion’ argument, and it is the very reason why so few of us feel able to make a stand. But once you have had half a dozen police officers searching your home over a few plants the long term damage is done and you have nothing more to fear. You are a criminal in the eyes of the law anyway so you may as well have your say.

    Lee Gramson

    February 10, 2011 at 11:34 am

  9. Thank you everyone, and thank you all for supporting it.

    I won’t take credit for the letter wording, the legal elements, and true addressing of the MoDA, were not mine as you can see. I do feel it is very important to address this correctly; beat them at their own game as it were. What a juxtaposed scenario where society asks for the MoDA to be used properly and pulling politicians up on how policy and law actually works. I’ve always felt this crucial – of course Darryl is the person to thank for this fully.

    As mad as a box of frogs that Darryl is, he is the crazed genius that is going make a difference in the fight I honestly feel.

    Jason Reed (HomeGrown Outlaw)

    February 10, 2011 at 9:54 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: