At least my diploma came from a school instead of off the back of a box of Cracker Jacks.
As for your specious dodge, you know damn well that the Courts have "found" a right to "regulate"/ban intra-State activities. Completely absent logic or Constitutional basis. Further, since when is a Person a "substance"? The regulatory control you cite clearly says "Persons". A perfect example of the liberal "mission creep" mindset I had you pegged as having.
Of course, I'm sure you have no problem with that either.
As for banning things coming into the Country, it's nice to know you approve of Bush's Eastern bloc firearms import ban as well. I knew you'd come up with a pro-gun control stance at some point.
There you go again, using words you don't understand.
Socialism. 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
Exactly what you are advocating. You are advocating for a Drug War, and the concomitant loss of liberty in every other area of our lives due to Drug War policies being applied everywhere else. From Search and Seizure to gun control. All started with the failed war on Alcohol being applied to the equally failed war on drugs.
Not that I expect to change your mind. You'd have to give up too many lovingly held and defended beliefs in the rightness of your cause. That sh*tting on the Constitution is worth it if you can keep even one (insert evil substance de jure) from making it into this Country.
Contraband and asset forfeiture laws represent one of the most heinous attacks on Liberty that we have ever seen in this nation.
And most "conservatives" have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
What part of "all heroin in the US is IMPORTED" don't you understand?
Moreover, despite the protestations of people like you, since the early 19th century, the commerce clause has been held to mean "It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed".
If you illegally import a product into the country, that is a FEDERAL concern. If you then take that illegally imported product and SELL it across state lines, that is another FEDERAL concern.
"Further, since when is a Person a "substance"? "
Clearly you don't know a thing about history, much less the original intent of the clause I cited. To people who weren't condemned to a life of public education, the intent of that particular constitutional provision is well known.
Since the mid-17th century, slaves in the American colonies were legally recognized PROPERTY. Just before the Art. I prohibition on Congress expired, Congress passed The Act to Prohibit the Importation of Slaves of 1807. This Act wasn't an immigration Act, it was a IMPORTATION act. It didn't forbid black, mulatto or other persons of color from emigrating to the US, it forbid the importation of people for SLAVERY.
"As for banning things coming into the Country, it's nice to know you approve of Bush's Eastern bloc firearms import ban as well"
Ah, now there's the proper employment of a straw man argument. The good news is that apparently you can learn. The bad news is it appears it's a very tedious process.
"Exactly what you are advocating.
What I'm advocating is the application of clearly stated constitutional principles. Just because you don't like those principles, doesn't mean I'm wrong or a Socialist.