Replies

The war on drugs is a good thing. It shows there is shred of morality left in the USA and that some things are wrong. This message is especially aimed at our kids. Ask any pot head if they want their teenager doing bong hits before school if pot is so benign.

I don’t think it’s benign. I just don’t believe this DEA guy’s crocodile tears.

Have you ever heard of the Tenth Amendment?

The war on drugs is a good thing. It shows there is shred of morality left in the USA and that some things are wrong.

<><><><><

Exactly, why should a state be able to enact its own laws when the US Constitution is mute on the topic?

Ask any pot head if they want their teenager doing bong hits before school if pot is so benign.

They probably don't want their kids downing a six-pack before school either, but that doesn't mean Prohibition itself wasn't worse than having alcohol legally available.

Here's how it really works...

The war on drugs is a good thing.

No; it's not. It's an usurpation of power and the means by which most of the bill of rights (and other legal rights) has been degraded.

The Unjust Justification The Injuries on Rights

The Unjust Justification	The Injuries on Rights
There is no constitutional authority for the federal regulation of drugs. Because of #1, the authority must be derived from somewhere: this somewhere is the commerce clause Because of #2, the power to regulate interstate commerce must be transformed into the power to regulate intrastate commerce. From the need of #3, Wickard is flatly established as "settled law" and precedent. #4 necessitates the elevation of precedent to the level of Constitutional Law (actually trumping it, when desired). #4 also is reinforced by making non-commerce regulatable under the interstate commerce powers (see Raich). The asset forfeiture laws make it profitable for police to make drug-related "busts". #7 also pressures the Judiciary to sign off on unreasonable searches. #7 and #8 pressures the Judiciary to excuse violence done by the police on the people. All of the above concentrate power into "the authorities" and allow them to excuse violations of the strictures imposed on them by the law.	Amendment X — `The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.` The powers used to regulate drugs are not delegated, they are assumed and invented. Amendment IX — `The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.` One such right is the classical presumption of innocence in traditional American Jurisprudence; another is that of the jury to try the law as well as the facts of the case (i.e. nullification). The War on Drugs has necessitated the usage of mandatory sentencing which, in the face of the general cultivation of ignorance surrounding jury-nullification, is essentially telling the jury that they must rule in accordance with the wishes of the State; this essentially turns the jury into a rubber stamp. Amendment VIII — `Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.` There is a cruelty, an inhumanity in our prison-system: the excessively long sentences — twenty years in snot uncommon, and that is a quarter of a man's life. Moreover, with the proliferation of felonies, even after serving the sentence the guilty are not fully restored to society, but instead relegated to a second-class citizen. This is cruel; if a person can never pay his debt to society then they should be killed, and their death balance the budget. Amendment VII &mdash `In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.` The seventh amendment has been relegated to a non-entity because the War on Drugs has proliferated the idea that all wrongs that are committed are maters of criminal law. Amendment VI — `In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.` The War on Drugs has hideously bogged down the courts, making the speedy qualifier a joke. Drug charges are commonly used to taint a jury against someone, and there is evidence that planting drugs is not an uncommon tactic of the police. Amendment V — No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. The War on Drugs has given rise to confiscation laws, which in turn deprive the accused of property before facing the lawful judgement of their peers. Moreover, with the ability to arrest (read confiscate) property, it is common that the accused has to prove their innocence. Amendment IV — `The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.` The War on Drugs has been used to facilitate no knock warrants, an affront to every American sensibility, and a flatly unreasonable method of search. (Literally, there is no way to reason with a no knock raid.) The exigent circumstances which allow warrantless search and seizure were invented because of the War on Drugs, and have been expanding ever since. Amendment III — `No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.` Generally thought to be laughable and 'dead' there recently was a real live third amendment case; while the police therein were looking for domestic violence the mentality they had was directly tied-to/grown-with The War on Drugs. (The article references The Rise of The Warrior Cop.) Amendment II — `A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.` Due to the proliferation of felonies, spurred on by the War on Drugs, the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms is taken as a matter of course. Instead of being taken as its passive-voice suggests and prohibiting the action of infringing, it is taken more as a suggestion – always ameniable to the exigent circumstances of common sense gun laws. As the above shows, ninety percent of the bill of rights has been negatively impacted by the War on Drugs.

There is no constitutional authority for the federal regulation of drugs.
Because of #1, the authority must be derived from somewhere: this somewhere is the commerce clause
Because of #2, the power to regulate interstate commerce must be transformed into the power to regulate intrastate commerce.
From the need of #3, Wickard is flatly established as "settled law" and precedent.
#4 necessitates the elevation of precedent to the level of Constitutional Law (actually trumping it, when desired).
#4 also is reinforced by making non-commerce regulatable under the interstate commerce powers (see Raich).
The asset forfeiture laws make it profitable for police to make drug-related "busts".
#7 also pressures the Judiciary to sign off on unreasonable searches.
#7 and #8 pressures the Judiciary to excuse violence done by the police on the people.
All of the above concentrate power into "the authorities" and allow them to excuse violations of the strictures imposed on them by the law.

Amendment X — The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The powers used to regulate drugs are not delegated, they are assumed and invented.
Amendment IX — The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
One such right is the classical presumption of innocence in traditional American Jurisprudence; another is that of the jury to try the law as well as the facts of the case (i.e. nullification). The War on Drugs has necessitated the usage of mandatory sentencing which, in the face of the general cultivation of ignorance surrounding jury-nullification, is essentially telling the jury that they must rule in accordance with the wishes of the State; this essentially turns the jury into a rubber stamp.
Amendment VIII — Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
There is a cruelty, an inhumanity in our prison-system: the excessively long sentences — twenty years in snot uncommon, and that is a quarter of a man's life. Moreover, with the proliferation of felonies, even after serving the sentence the guilty are not fully restored to society, but instead relegated to a second-class citizen. This is cruel; if a person can never pay his debt to society then they should be killed, and their death balance the budget.
Amendment VII &mdash In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
The seventh amendment has been relegated to a non-entity because the War on Drugs has proliferated the idea that all wrongs that are committed are maters of criminal law.
Amendment VI — In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The War on Drugs has hideously bogged down the courts, making the speedy qualifier a joke. Drug charges are commonly used to taint a jury against someone, and there is evidence that planting drugs is not an uncommon tactic of the police.
Amendment V — No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The War on Drugs has given rise to confiscation laws, which in turn deprive the accused of property before facing the lawful judgement of their peers. Moreover, with the ability to arrest (read confiscate) property, it is common that the accused has to prove their innocence.
Amendment IV — The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The War on Drugs has been used to facilitate no knock warrants, an affront to every American sensibility, and a flatly unreasonable method of search. (Literally, there is no way to reason with a no knock raid.) The exigent circumstances which allow warrantless search and seizure were invented because of the War on Drugs, and have been expanding ever since.
Amendment III — No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Generally thought to be laughable and 'dead' there recently was a real live third amendment case; while the police therein were looking for domestic violence the mentality they had was directly tied-to/grown-with The War on Drugs. (The article references The Rise of The Warrior Cop.)
Amendment II — A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Due to the proliferation of felonies, spurred on by the War on Drugs, the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms is taken as a matter of course. Instead of being taken as its passive-voice suggests and prohibiting the action of infringing, it is taken more as a suggestion – always ameniable to the exigent circumstances of common sense gun laws.

As the above shows, ninety percent of the bill of rights has been negatively impacted by the War on Drugs.