Re: [FSP] Re: One Thing about the abolish Drug Laws argument
- [Moderator note: This is getting off of FSP business... let's try to keep it on track!]
On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 08:05:20PM -0000, Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Michael Wilson"
> <wilsonmc@m...> wrote:
> > Please folks, don't forget about the feds. Look at what they're doing
> > in States which have legalized medicinal Marijuana;, they are still
> > closing clinics and enforcing the Federal laws.
> That's not a problem. No one is suggesting that we get rid of Federal
> Drugs Laws, any more than we will get rid of Federal Gun Laws. what
> we CAN AND WILL do, though, is get rid of STATE Prohibition. And
> there is nothing the Feds can do about tHAT. They are still welcome
> to spend THEIR money to enforce whatever Federal Laws they like; but
> there's no reason a STATE ought to be doing it for them.
The Office of National Drug Control Policy involved itself in a recent
Nevada ballot initiative:
Walters also made a point of interjecting himself into the Arizona,
Nevada, and Ohio initiative contests personally, traveling to all
three states for public appearances. His campaigning raised questions
about the propriety of a federal official stumping against statewide
ballot initiatives, which Walters dismissed with a combination of
arguments: he was begged by anti-initiative forces to make an
appearance, and he wasn?t spending ONDCP cash to do so.
The minimum drinking age and highway speed limits are two other examples
in which the federal government interposed itself in state-level policy
One measure of friendship consists not in the number of things friends
can discuss, but in the number of things they need no longer mention.
- --- In email@example.com, "Michael Wilson"
> Please folks, don't forget about the feds. Look at what they'redoing in States which have legalized medicinal Marijuana;, they are
still closing clinics and enforcing the Federal laws. So we can talk
all we want about making this legal and that legal and until you can
figure out a way to make the feds go away, nothing changes. Local
taxes, local victimless crimes can all be voted on and changed,
drivers license requirements etc can all be locally changed, once you
start messing with what the feds say is their direct domain, I don't
care if you have 20,000 like minded people, you will lose.
>In Montana, the feds can't come in within permission from the
> Baby steps, folks baby steps
Sheriff! We'll need to elect a good Sheriff to begin with, who will
not enforce victimless 'laws'.
Note the (') marks. Many of these 'laws' are not Laws. They are
Statutes or Regulations. Violation of them is NOT a 'Crime'.
A 'Crime' needs a Victim to swear out a Complaint.