Addicted to the Drug War

Ludwig von Mises Institute ^ | December 28, 2001 | Ilana Mercer

[dcwusmc]

I submit you're right. I just wish the Anti-Constitutionalists would have the stones to disclose their TRUE agenda for America. Their blind hatred for their country, its citizens and themselves is tragic for ALL of us.

[tpaine]

I hope to get some cheese with me whine any day now.

[Zon]

Whatta dolt.

I like that.

Do you think there's any chance we might be able to get some cheese with those Drivel McNuggets, it being a holiday and all?

Like that too. 

Drivel Mc Nuggets for Dolts!

Could be a campaign slogan for the integrity impaired.

[Zon]

tp credit

Whatta dolt.

[stryker]

What all the pro-WOD posters always ignore is that anyone that wants to take an illegal drug can do so at anytime they want to, even if they are incarcerated in prison. So the WOD does absolutely nothing to prevent the use of illegal drugs or the creation of addicts. What it does do is drive up the price of those drugs so that addicts must commit crimes, sometimes violent, to satisfy their habits, create a new economic elite composed of criminals that influence our judicial, legislative, and executive branches of government, make illegal drugs more accessible to minors, continually erode the constitutional rights of all Americans, turn otherwise honest cops into professional perjurers, create a self-perpetuating criminal justice bureaucracy that costs taxpayers trillions of dollars, introduces marijuana smokers to dealers in harder drugs, makes cocaine easier to obtain for children than alcohol, and causes pervasive disrespect for the men we should most respect in our communities--the police.

In short, how do you explain to your child who is faced with a lifelong felony conviction for doing something that the Governor of Florida and the last two Presidents of the United States have done why he will be treated differently than them.

I can find no logical basis for the position of those who continue to favor the WOD. Their refusal to abandon a position that on all logical counts is destroying this country as gravely as did slavery, and I make this charge not lightly, is beyond foolishness. It is beyond insanity. It is hatred, pure and simple, for what they see as an alternative culture. Blind, bloody, hatred, with no regard for the future of this nation.

[dcwusmc]

It is completely understandable if you look at it from the perspective of CONTROL. For that is what it's about. All of them understand there is no Constitutional basis for it, but they want to CONTROL the people of this country. They view government as a growth industry and the Constitution as a SUGGESTION. It's not about drugs and never really was. It has ALWAYS been about controlling one or another segment of the populace. Since Nixon, it's no longer segmented; they want control over ALL OF US and this is the pretext.

[dcwusmc]

Andif you think I'm WRONG, look at Lady Doc's rants: KILL those who refuse to be controlled. Of course, that's why part of the WOsD is a War on Firearms Owners. Demonize, control, kill.

"Constitution? We don't NEED no steenking Constit-U-tion!"

[Roscoe]

1. Can you point to ANY article in the Constitution which grants FedGov the authority to ban anything?

2...there's a MAJOR difference between outlawing a vile trade in human beings and banning the simple posession and use of inanimate objects by consenting adults.

Quick change of tune,heh?

[tacticalogic]

It is completely understandable if you look at it from the perspective of CONTROL. For that is what it's about. All of them understand there is no Constitutional basis for it, but they want to CONTROL the people of this country. They view government as a growth industry and the Constitution as a SUGGESTION.

It also makes sense when you look at it from the perspective of the federal bureaucracy. The alphabet agencies are filled with career bureaucrats who have every intention of retiring with a full pension. Controlling other people's lives is their livlihood, and the more of it they do, the more they get paid. Your freedom and their career objectives are in direct conflict with each other.

[dcwusmc]

Considering what was the topic of the thread, hardly a change of tune. Of course, you cannot point to any authority for FedGov to ban substances or objects, 'cause it is NOT THERE. Per the founders, FedGov can do ONLY WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS IT MAY, not whatever "feels good" at the moment. You guys are just like the LIBERAL statists: if it ain't there, INVENT IT.

[Roscoe]

"The administrative law judge recommends that the Administrator conclude that the marijuana plant considered as a whole has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, that there is no lack of accepted safety for use of it under medical supervision and that it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II. The judge recommends that the Administrator transfer marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II."

It still required an intervention by the District Supremes...

So the "recommendation" has NO legal force at all.

Quite a non-issue for all the huffing and puffing.

[Roscoe]

Cognitive dissonance defined.

What's especially curious is how they parrot the same meritless positions. Some forms of nonsense are apparently contagious.

[dcwusmc]

You also have to consider that most bureaucraps are control-freaks anyway, else why would they get into that line of work? The ninja-suits and the no-knock raids are the emotional equivalent of sexual release for these pencil-necks who probably got turned down even by the town pump when they were growing up. This experience is likely what turned them to be ninjas. It's kinda like being able to rape that prom queen who wouldn't speak to them. It's life-or-death POWER over somebody else and it's a MAJOR orgasm for these freaks.

BTW, I can respect (and back up, if needs be) the beat cop who has the protection of the public from VIOLENT criminals as his or her goal, but when they get off into ninja bs and asset-theft, that goes out the window, too!

[Roscoe]

Do the Dred Scott findings of 1838 re-instate slavery?

No. Never read the decision, huh?

[dcwusmc]

Roscoe, if you had READ the thread you would have learned that the INTERVENTION was so that DEA would NOT HAVE TO COMPLY with the finding by the ALJ. But that would surely not have suited your agenda, would it?

[Roscoe]

Of course, you cannot point to any authority for FedGov to ban substances or objects

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

And for extra credit, can you tell me what this means?

Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

[Roscoe]

...the INTERVENTION was so that DEA would NOT HAVE TO COMPLY...

So the "recommendation" is a long dead moot point. Your trump card turned out to be a two of clubs.

[dcwusmc]

I figured you would say that.

"Under the Constitution, Congress has the power to regulate commerce among the states. From 1887-1937, the Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the Commerce Clause and struck down numerous federal laws, such as those regulating the mining and manufacturing industries. Since then, the Court has permitted wide-ranging Congressional legislation, including child labor laws and civil rights statutes prohibiting racial discrimination in places of public accomodations. "

(source)http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/documents/constitution.html

In other words, this only started happening during the reign of everyone's favorite Potentate, Frankin Delano Roosevelt. But I suppose that he is another of your idols, he and his "packed" Supreme Court, huh? But he and the Congress sure did take this country for a fine ride using the commerce clause. Are you SURE you want to keep going there?

[tpaine]

Trump fantasies.

Whatta dork.

[dcwusmc]

And for extra credit, can you tell me what this means?
Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Sure. One of only THREE Constitutionally-sanctioned FEDERAL crimes, the other two being Piracy and Treason. IOW, FedGov has NO POWER to make things into CRIMES under the Constitution, excepting ONLY the listed three. A stretch COULD be made for federal military installations where the Constitution allows jurisdiction. Otherwise, no way, Jose!

ALL crime is LOCAL and that was how the Framers wanted it, so that the minions of the federal government could NOT, as the minions of George III had, take an accused anywhere the accusers could find a friendly judge to hang the poor sod!