oh, gee, sorry I forgot to add you, but where, in stating my opinion, did I lie? You DO support the immoral, unconstitutional war on drugs still, don’t you? Which, since that is the excuse offered up for waging war on gun-owners, means, by definition, you oppose the Second Amendment; you oppose the Fourth Amendment restrictions on governmental searches and seizures; and all the other assaults on individual liberty engendered by the Feddie’s illicit seizure of power in restricting and limiting the GROWNUPS of this “free” country’s ability to decide for themselves what things they should or should not put into their own bodies. Anymore, this has also come to include depriving parents of THEIR proper authority to decide what, in THEIR SOLE OPINION, is best for their children.
I support the Constitution, federalism and states rights, dummy. The major function of the federal government is to protect and defend the nation and its people from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. That means employing a robust military force to guard US sovereignty and interests at home and abroad. That means assuring military veterans receive special consideration and certain entitlements for serving their country and putting their own lives on the line in defense of America.
Otherwise, a limited government works best and keeps our freedoms intact,. A limited government means low taxes, minimal regulations, along with an open and free market enterprise system in which small businesses can expand and flourish. That means a smaller federal bureaucracy with NO government run welfare program, NO government run education authority, NO government run retirement program, NO government run medical payment system for seniors, NO government run drug program and NO government run national health care program.
I agree with the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution. The Founders&Framers believed each state was a laboratory in democracy where the people could experiment on what kind of government worked best for the individual interests of their state. I support the people of each individual state making decisions for their own citizens on a local basis.
As I've told you before, the national drug control policy of the federal government is both moral and Constitutional. The American people overwhelmingly oppose legalizing heroin, cocaine, opium, morphine, methamphetamine, or anyother designer drug of choice. That includes marijuana. One more time.
The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 is the law of the land. The 1991 SCOTUS decision in Touby v USA was unanimous and upheld the CSA.
Congress can legislate under the Commerce Clause. The ONLY issue was one of delegation, can Congress delegate it's legislative authority to an executive-branch agency. Again, under fairly settled law, Congress can so long as it limits the discretion of the agency and provides the overall structure/guidance to the agency in the grant of delegation, and so long as the agency follows established principles of administrative law (due process, review and comment, etc).
In addition, I cite Justice Scalia's concurance in the judgment of AG Gonzales v Raich, of June.6,2005.
"I agree with the Court's holding that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) may validly be applied to respondents' cultivation, distribution, and possession of marijuana for personal, medicinal use."
"Since Perez v. United States, 402 U. S. 146 (1971), our cases have mechanically recited that the Commerce Clause permits congressional regulation of three categories: (1) the channels of interstate commerce; (2) the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and persons or things in interstate commerce; and (3) activities that "substantially affect" interstate commerce.