Time to fire up the Campaign. Help Us Help You Abrogate Prohibition.

Well, it's a new year. and a new season, a new President, but the same old War on Drugs...You can wait to see what President Elect Trump has in mind, but he has said all that he needed to say on his campaign. He very clearly, multiple times said, "I believe it is a states rights issue." We plan on holding him to his words.

When Abrogate started late 2015, we knew it was going to be a long shot to make it to 2016 Ballot. We got approval to circulate December 30th, 2015, and 14 days later were out collecting signatures and recruiting more petitioners. We got a late start and had to come out in Shotgun/Hail Mary formation to try to beat the July 11th deadline. Obviously, we didn't have enough signatures to turn in, but we expected that there were 193 days to do what is allotted 180 days with no other major setup time.

We didn't ask for much other than hearts and minds to help collect signatures for the Right Thing. If we are going to spend the resources, time, effort, and expense, not to mention blood, sweat, and tears why give the state the ability to beat us over the head at the end of it all? This is my question.

2016 was a great learning experience none the less and going forward from here, we will apply that knowledge to a more successful run with the Abrogate Prohibition Campaign. 2016 is last year, and it's time to do what we didn't have time to do in 2015. Get organized and ready to petition for signatures this year. We are officially up and running as of Jan 1st again.

So we are currently recruiting volunteers to help in all facets of this campaign. We are looking for all you self-starting community organizers and leaders who would rather put their efforts, time, and money into ending the arrests, fines, prosecutions, and persecutions, then giving Lansing more ways to arrest and fine you with these new pieces of legislation we have to work under. Got your Patient Manifestos all 'Properly' filled out Caregivers?

It is a lot to ask for support, especially if the group/s asking for it are just looking to pass more legislation Lansing can have their way with.
Which is why Abrogate is working to remove cannabis from the Michigan Controlled Substances Act with our campaign to amend the constitution.

The entire reason we have a petition process, and more specifically the indelible right to amend the State Constitution in the first place is so We the People can do what Lansing is too afraid, too derelict, or too corrupt to do. Where Cannabis is concerned, it is clearly all 3.

Legislators in Lansing have the authority to do the right thing, even the half-assed right thing, but they objectively refuse, because there is "Nothing in it" and it is "too dangerous". Which is Exactly Why we need to resolve this issue ourselves and do it the only way Legislators can not manipulate it like they did the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.

With a direct amendment to the Michigan Constitution to remove cannabis in its entirety from the Public Health Code, thereby fully and completely legalizing all uses of cannabis for all adults and 18 yr olds who are no longer enrolled in high school, we will end all arrests, fines, kidnappings, and other state mandated penalties for cannabis use. All minors and wards will be under their parents/guardians authorization and who are the only ones that need to authorize any use for their wards and/or children.

This includes on the farm, in the family business, as well as for nutritional and health needs of said children and wards as well as adults.
Returning parental/guardian rights is a must to protect not just the parent, but the children from CPS and a vindictive legislature and government, if not a soon to be ex. You get the 'Right To Remain Silent' with recreational pot legislation.

The last 6 months of 2016 should tell you what to expect out of Lansing D.C. going forward and any groups that are pandering to its legislators are not there lobbying for 'You the People'. Unlike the Nationals Groups and the locals like MRC/MCC/MiLegalize, Abrogate is not working for the Legislators in Lansing D.C., nor the lobbyist that pollute them, nor the rich special interest that pay the lobbyist to buy the legislators for their competition controlling legislation and corruption.
Abrogate is of, by and for We the People.

Abrogate's out here with We the People because Abrogate Prohibition is We the People.
Abrogate is the Peoples Amendment. Abrogate saves You from arrest. Abrogate saves You from persecution and prosecution.
Abrogate saves You from excessive fines and fees.
Abrogate also saves you from burdensome legislation and overbearing excise taxes. It also saves your children and grandchildren just the same!

Abrogate does allow for rational, commonplace legislation along with general sales tax on the whole pie. Not just the 6% slice of pie that is recreational/medical marijuana. Abrogate makes cannabis products on par with any other like Product.
So let me ask you all this, Who would you rather help take control of the Cannabis plant.

a) Lansing D.C. and a small group of insiders? If that's you, support the weak legislation bound to come out of the recreational like alcohol groups. All you will see there is pandering to Lansing and the 'Special Few'. or
b) would you rather support an Amendment that Lansing just can not "Legislate" their way around?

If that is more your speed then time to join Abrogate Prohibition is now, not later.

We all have seen the last 2 months. Nationally and here in the State.
We need all the help we can get. We need you to get involved to help end this insanity.
If you are ready to End Prohibition, actually end it, and not just leave it up to the corrupted pockets in Lansing D.C. to 'work out later', regardless of Who is Elected to where or when then step up and help us Abrogate Prohibition.

We have a new campaign model plan, new website, new more support, and the same simple to understand and get behind language to actually redress prohibition here in Michigan.

Come with us.
End The Mission
Abrogate Prohibition.
Join us on our new easy to use, easy to navigate, and easy to join, website.

Help Us Help You End Prohibition in Michigan Today.

Abrogate Prohibition < click link to joint with us @ www.abrogate.org


Abrogate Prohibition

Wish we had ammended the pch 8 years ago..wtf were ppl thinking lol!!!

@Timmahh What gave you the insight to maintain a 6 month signature drive last year?

@Timmahh my apologies with going MIA last signature drive. A moving of the family, and getting situated in new home took precedence. Now that is behind me, I'm fully on board with gathering these signatures & have hundreds of verbal "yes".
-Shifty

It happens.

pergamum362 said:

Wish we had ammended the pch 8 years ago..wtf were ppl thinking lol!!!

Click to expand...

Aye. It was touted as a "Constitutional Amendment" which was a lie out of the gate. The MMM Act of 2008 was just an Indirect Statutory Initiative.
Not sure if I would have voted for it had i known that, but it is likely I would have then. Knowing what I know today, we were better off under full on prohibition I think.

TheMan13 said:

@Timmahh What gave you the insight to maintain a 6 month signature drive last year?

Click to expand...

The 180-day petition limit has been one of the hurdles of the petitioning process since 1973. Originally I thought it was put in place with Public Act 116 of 1954, when the right to Petition for Indirect Statutory Initiatives and Constitutional Amendments was first put into the Michigan Constitution.


But every initiative and amendment since 1973 has had to clear the 180-day signature clause.

Election Law is Authored under Constitutional Authority by Legislature. So the 180-day rule has been in place for 43 years.
While it may not be Constitutional, our battle is with the Constitutionality of Prohibition, not Election Laws.

The other issue was once past 6 months old, signatures older than 180-days are considered stale by legislative law,
The 3rd was to make the Nov 2016 ballot, we had to have collected the 315,654 plus valid voter signatures and turn them in by the July 11th deadline.

But as far as maintaining a 180-day collection timeframe, that is the law.
We are doing the same thing this year. The problem with continuing to collect signatures is you risk screwing the pooch like what happened last year.
Abrogate Purposely did not try to compete with the other campaigns as to not confuse and increase the odds of all groups failing...
So we never planned to start collecting signatures until 2016 anyways, which left us a very slim 194ish day window with 180-day time limit out of that.

It wasn't anything but reading the laws and understanding how they are applied.

letdown shifty said:

@Timmahh my apologies with going MIA last signature drive. A moving of the family, and getting situated in new home took precedence. Now that is behind me, I'm fully on board with gathering these signatures & have hundreds of verbal "yes".
-Shifty

Click to expand...

Is no worry Shifty.
As much as we all would have liked to have seen it on the ballot in Nov. we knew we were coming out in shotgun formation and tossing a hail mary to Nov 2016. It was a Great experience and a lot was learned.
Which is why we are setting up now. We need all our volunteers to join the new website and give us their email address so we have a way to contact them. We are ready to take direct donations by Credit Card and are looking to build our Warchest.
We need Federal Reserve Notes if we are going to wage a good battle.

We'll take all the help wherever we can get it and legally accept it from.

It is time to
End The Mission
Abrogate Michigan
www.abrogate.org

Wishing you good luck for all of our sakes. I may get involved in the ground battle, i think abrogate is far better than the other alternatives being thrown around. I will commit, when i know im committed.

Timmahh said:

The 180-day petition limit has been one of the hurdles of the petitioning process since 1973. Originally I thought it was put in place with Public Act 116 of 1954, when the right to Petition for Indirect Statutory Initiatives and Constitutional Amendments was first put into the Michigan Constitution.


But every initiative and amendment since 1973 has had to clear the 180-day signature clause.

Election Law is Authored under Constitutional Authority by Legislature. So the 180-day rule has been in place for 43 years.
While it may not be Constitutional, our battle is with the Constitutionality of Prohibition, not Election Laws.

The other issue was once past 6 months old, signatures older than 180-days are considered stale by legislative law,
The 3rd was to make the Nov 2016 ballot, we had to have collected the 315,654 plus valid voter signatures and turn them in by the July 11th deadline.

But as far as maintaining a 180-day collection timeframe, that is the law.
We are doing the same thing this year. The problem with continuing to collect signatures is you risk screwing the pooch like what happened last year.
Abrogate Purposely did not try to compete with the other campaigns as to not confuse and increase the odds of all groups failing...
So we never planned to start collecting signatures until 2016 anyways, which left us a very slim 194ish day window with 180-day time limit out of that.

It wasn't anything but reading the laws and understanding how they are applied.

Click to expand...

Well said Timmahh. Yet what seems so obvious to us somehow eluded that gaggle of NORML attorneys selling their professional "legal services" for a living and left MILegalize and all those who donated time and money dead in the water. Yet MMFLA somehow emerged from Lansing at this same time involving so many of those same "professionals" ...

malpractice
1. Law. failure of a professional person, as a physician or lawyer, to render proper services through reprehensible ignorance or negligence or through criminal intent, especially when injury or loss follows.

You and Abrogate have my support brother, although I am concerned about using 18 rather than 21 for an age limit as legal precedents favor the latter. But we've had that conversation in the past. Good luck brother and let me know what I can do to be of assistance.

TheMan13 said:

You and Abrogate have my support brother, although I am concerned about using 18 rather than 21 for an age limit as legal precedents favor the latter. But we've had that conversation in the past. Good luck brother and let me know what I can do to be of assistance.

Click to expand...

I also once had an issue with the wording on the age requirements, thinking that 18 was just too young to make that decision. But then after contemplation I realized, 18 is the age we have assigned to make life decisions like; college, or military. If you are old enough to decide what to do with your life or to decided to serve one's country then you are old enough to smoke a plant.
Notice that I have not used the word Mature, that is because until we can discern someone's maturity level and use that as our scale on which to judge someone's readiness by default we have to go by age (right or wrong).
-Shifty

I in no way question the legitimacy of an 18 year old to make adult decisions, but our courts and government clearly have and especially when it comes to their prohibition schemes (handguns, alcohol, gambling and now tobacco). Age discrimination and these prohibition schemes seem problematic in general under our Constitutional rule of law, but that is a moot point when considering the reality that our courts and government have repeatedly secured such opposing legal precedents of which literally precede any other "rule of law" (aka Common Law).

My point is essentially it is reasonable to take on one fight at a time to avoid a loss in the end.

@TheMan13 I completely understand your argument, and please don't think I was calling you out in any way. You are obviously well versed in Constitutional law, and Abrogate should be much stronger with an advocate like you.
-Shifty

TheMan13 said:

I in no way question the legitimacy of an 18-year-old to make adult decisions, but our courts and government clearly have and especially when it comes to their prohibition schemes (handguns, alcohol, gambling and now tobacco). Age discrimination and these prohibition schemes seem problematic in general under our Constitutional rule of law, but that is a moot point when considering the reality that our courts and government have repeatedly secured such opposing legal precedents of which literally precede any other "rule of law" (aka Common Law).

My point is essentially it is reasonable to take on one fight at a time to avoid a loss in the end.

Click to expand...

Government thinks the only decision minors can make without an adult present is the decision to fuck an adult, consent to an abortion, or to birth control.
But they still want to hold the parent responsible for those choices the child was told they could make without their parents.

Old enough to send somewhere with a gun to die and kill, old enough to smoke a plant or grow 1000 acres of them\ in my opinion.

Old enough to choose birth control, to have an abortion, or to fuck an adult, old enough to chose to smoke a plant. But even I have my limits and 18 as low as it goes.

We allow 15 yr olds to sue their parents and be self-emancipated. But choosing to self-medicate with Mary J Wana is just too dangerous.

Luckily, like cannabis use, we don't need to care what the "government" wants.

Timmahh said:

Government thinks the only decision minors can make without an adult present is the decision to fuck an adult, consent to an abortion, or to birth control.
But they still want to hold the parent responsible for those choices the child was told they could make without their parents.

Old enough to send somewhere with a gun to die and kill, old enough to smoke a plant or grow 1000 acres of them\ in my opinion.

Old enough to choose birth control, to have an abortion, or to fuck an adult, old enough to chose to smoke a plant. But even I have my limits and 18 as low as it goes.

We allow 15 yr olds to sue their parents and be self-emancipated. But choosing to self-medicate with Mary J Wana is just too dangerous.

Click to expand...

I don't think a single person is arguing with that, Tim. Couple dudes think the campaign is more signature friendly if the age is 21. I agree with them because that's how voters work, but I also completely agree with what you've said. I'm also gravely concerned that voters won't go for a constitutional amendment. It's a historically difficult achievement. However, I also see it as a great tool to lock this shit up and keep the suits off of it.

May I suggest that you just take an inclusive approach to this initiative. Explain briefly and politely why you chose 18. Don't alienate people. Every conversation is a chance to plant a seed. The more kindness and civility that goes into those conversations, the more receptive people will be. I don't think 'they're already fucking, dying, and killing babies' is your best line.

Had a conversation yesterday with someone who used to work in the Legislature in Lansing. Brought up the different initiatives and ultimately talked at length about Abrogate, and why I support it over the ilks of MiLegalize (which I will not go in depth about). She had never heard of Abrogate, and very easily and quicky jumped on the train, as it's the only true way of cutting the bullshit.

My two cents is our biggest issue is an identity, and if we just get out there and raise awareness of what the cause is and what we the people are trying to cure. Get your ducks in order, but dammit we need people spreading imformation. Get those signatures without getting them until they truly matter.
/rant
-Shifty

I am curious why Abrogate has not been working to get the word out. Why has there been no fundraisers etc?
milegalize is in full fundraiser/ public awareness mode. Come Dec. signature collecting will need to begin...
people not being aware will make this task more daunting for Abrogate imho.
Come on guys, gotta kick it into high gear!!!

Fozze said:

I don't think a single person is arguing with that, Tim. Couple dudes think the campaign is more signature friendly if the age is 21. I agree with them because that's how voters work, but I also completely agree with what you've said. I'm also gravely concerned that voters won't go for a constitutional amendment. It's a historically difficult achievement. However, I also see it as a great tool to lock this shit up and keep the suits off of it.

May I suggest that you just take an inclusive approach to this initiative. Explain briefly and politely why you chose 18. Don't alienate people. Every conversation is a chance to plant a seed. The more kindness and civility that goes into those conversations, the more receptive people will be. I don't think 'they're already fucking, dying, and killing babies' is your best line.

Click to expand...

I can appreciate that. I really can. It is one of the biggest quirks those in the community tend to anticipate. I do as well, and have given this particular point much indepth thought. But again, the truth shall set us free.

Ask them this. Should we arrest them, lock them up, likely ruin their jobs, education, future potentials, Pay 1000s in tax payer funds to lock up people under 21 for cannabis use/possession?
Or should those children be returned to their parents to deal with? And if the parent want, they can press charges for Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor charges, etc.

Everyone asks, should minors be smoking recreational pot? That is the wrong question. Nearly everyone will automatically answer no obviously.
The question we need to be asking is
"SHOULD WE BE ARRESTING MINORS and THOSE UNDER 21 WHEN THEY DO?
The only people that say yes to this are LEO and those in Government that are financially tied to those minors being put into the system, CPS, Prisons, Paroles, Probation, LEO, etc...


But you ask them that that way, and nealry every one of them will say, No Arrest, It is a parental issue. Hand them the board and they'll sign.
Then if they are still hesitant, say "Do you want your child/grandchild arrested? Or brought back home for Cannabis things?" Remind them these 18 yr olds are being given guns and sent overseas to kill and lose friends and body parts and come home with PTSD/War Nerves.


How are farmers going to grow Cannabis/Hemp by the acres if they have to have their children sequestered from the farm? Or the Manufacturer? Or the Business person? Parents need Authority so their children can not be used as weapons by CPS/LEO and the State.

If the state can take the children and use it for control THEY WILL! We must make it parental Authorization only required to protect the kids. Not from the Drug Dealers on the Street, but the ones in the Drs offices and in Lansing D.C.

letdown shifty said:

Had a conversation yesterday with someone who used to work in the Legislature in Lansing. Brought up the different initiatives and ultimately talked at length about Abrogate, and why I support it over the ilks of MiLegalize (which I will not go in depth about). She had never heard of Abrogate, and very easily and quicky jumped on the train, as it's the only true way of cutting the bullshit.

My two cents is our biggest issue is an identity, and if we just get out there and raise awareness of what the cause is and what we the people are trying to cure. Get your ducks in order, but dammit we need people spreading imformation. Get those signatures without getting them until they truly matter.
/rant
-Shifty

Click to expand...

I need her name and Contact info please. PM It to me if you would, or giver her mine.

Timothy Locke
[email protected]
Abrogate.org
(989) 600-4760