Messages

So, you can't think of any evidence that would cause you to concede your argument...

I guess that means this isn't a discussion. It never was a discussion. It never will be a discussion. You're basically preaching.

Let's be specific.  What argument do you want me to concede?  

I mean, I'm not getting any concessions either here.  Like that some of the successes in Europe first came with some initial increases, which are real kids with real lives.  Is anyone going to concede to that?  

That there is no federal standing, at least not as currently expressed. Here's the breakdown.

Federal standing as asserted under the CSA is that since drugs are often transported through international or interstate channels, the power to regulate them is granted to congress under the commerce clause of the Constitution, as amplified by the "necessary and proper" clause.

That regulate = ban is open for discussion, but let's just assume it to be true in this case.

The question then is, is the control of a substance produced in one state, unless explicitly intended for distribution across state lines, within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government? To the extent that jurisdictional authority is exercised in ways that are "necessary and proper" to preventing interstate traffic in that substance, yes. Well, under the 10th any power that's not been delegated to the federal government "is reserved to the states or the people respectively". The constitution does not grant the Federal government the power to ban the production, possession, distribution or consumption of anything, therefore that power belongs to the states. The CSA's constitutionality is based on the proposition that violation of the 10th amendment is "necessary and proper" to enforce it's jurisdictional authority over interstate drug traffic. IOW, the ban on production is constitutional because it's constitutional to violate the constitution (which it is within a certain scope and I believe only under executive authority, though I could be wrong on this).

So unless it's constitutional to violate the constitution, or another logical breakdown can be presented, the CSA has no standing.

If you're interested in how it's held up under Supreme Court scrutiny, I'm pretty familiar with most of the relevant decisions (which makes me a BLAST at parties) but I have a really hard time discussing them without gratuitous caps-lock abuse and many, many a dirty swear word. Think, citation of precedent with loosely similar facts to find various ways of concluding that the 10th amendment doesn't apply...SWEAR...

---

That having been said, the constitutionality question doesn't address any opinion on legalization or criminalization, just the way it's approached on a strictly federal level.

[Arguing Rarely Persuades People]

I sense you are bringing articles of war to a mudfight.

I refer you to Cain's Rules for Life (IntermittensXX p32)



Arguing Rarely Persuades People

More often than not, if you argue
with someone, they will become
more set in their ways and more
stubborn, less open to criticism.  If
you have to convince someone, use
examples, not words.


From what it sounds like, your case will be better argued using image macros and snippets from Culture Jam or Adbusters.

Yes, you need to be careful about these things, see this for more info (I can't remember if I was linked to this from here or not, so sorry if it's a repost).

I like that article. It pretty much confirms everything I've ever said to anybody ever.

GOSH, it sure seems like that would be a more reasonable way of dealing with...

oh never mind.

I've got some agree on this.

A foregone conclusion is just where you...ah fuck it?

Please note, also, that the general welfare clause extends only to funding, not to criminal behavior.

That can easily be "cured" with the right precedent. Hell, if the Supreme's had been with the program from day one like the good little mouthpieces they were intended to be, they'd have the whole damn Constitution carved up one word at a time on one of those refrigerator magnet poetry sets. Be a hell of a lot easier to get the decision they wanted, that way. Wouldn't even need to refer back to the original text at all next time they had to voodoo a couple of plants in someone's living room into "interstate commerce" (under DoJ authority, of course).

We are in Greeley, Co now. Expect the kids to come over after a while. We will probably stay here until Sunday morning, then head south.

Water lines froze last night but thawed today with no broken pipes.

How did you find Greeley? I'm right up the road in Fort Collins. Curious to hear an impression of that city that's not over-burdened by a familiarity with it's reputation.

Hello Pastor Blastor, I like your avatar.

Thanks. When I came upon it IRL, at first I just thought it was kind of stupid, maybe redundant even. But the more I overthink it the more I see the evil genius. It's a perfect way to troll for knee-jerk anti-authoritarians.

"Well normally the fact that the bike trail is 5 feet under a rapidly flowing, flooded river would stop me from trying to ride any further, but then again, these asshole politicians can fuck themselves where they sit if they think I'm a let some bullshit barricade rob me of my liberty to ride where I want. YEEE-HAW...FIGHT THE burble-burble-choke."

Sadly I don't believe it claimed any victims this year, but I'm not giving up on the model.

Hello, Hello, Hello,

Check it out. I've got an opinion.

First off, BIP, hit me right where I live. I gotta call that immaculate, fuck all else. Came to PD.com cause, frankly, the world was breaking my god-damned heart and I kinda hankered for an old familiar bit of levity. Instead, I found something I found much more substantial...a hearty A-MEN! I could pick it apart and point out where it strayed from what I consider very essential elements in PD, address my philosophical misgivings with the contents, armchair quarterback the game plan and execution, but at the moment I'm just not that interested in doing so. Mostly, by way of introduction, I'm just interested in saying that I felt every damned bit of it, even, and maybe especially, what I considered utter bullshit.

"A lot of us don't really have it in us to go to great lengths to disguise the message any more," was like a hug at a funeral.
...And the term "Bliss Ninny," just really, REALLY needed to be coined.

I'll maybe slap y'all with some fishes or something later, but for now, I'm a just leave it at that.