Missing Legality

Prompted by “Drug Use Is Not Illegal: How Police Justify Arrests”: http://www.hightimes.com/read/drug-use-not-illegal-how-police-justify-arrests

That article unintentionally epitomizes why I began our Respect Cannabis campaign, despite the existence of many well-established drug policy reform organizations.

High Times magazine is dominated by traditional political leftists (at least imho, but that article really helps prove that dominance).

There is a fundamental problem with using the police to force people into drug treatment.

Agreed. Unhealthy stress is the true cause of abusive behavior. Judicially applying more unhealthy stress is plain wrong, and there’s a serious conflict of interest compelling drug prohibition addicts to harmfully force many people into treatment whom are not expertly diagnosed as needing that treatment (e.g. someone just caught smoking a joint — basically equal to someone drinking some alcohol one time).

Illegal drug use is not against the law. This may surprise most people. However, there is a constitutional problem with criminalizing addiction.

The Supreme Court ruled in Robinson v. California (1961) that sending people to jail for the disease of addiction was cruel and unusual punishment and a violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. The state cannot punish people because of their drug addiction “status.” It is because of this case that modern anti-drug laws concern the manufacture, purchase, sale or possession of illegal drugs.

In other words, drug laws are about economic activity rather than health issues.

It doesn’t surprise me, but that Supreme Court ruling did add to my understanding of this serious issue that honestly undeniably extends to affect us all.

The idea of using the police to decide who needs medical care and to compel individuals into receiving it contradicts the core American values of freedom and personal responsibility.

It is also essentially unconstitutional.

But it is a great racket.

Not to be a jerk about it, but to exercise courage against dominant consensus for the sake of justice — so too is traditional political leftism — which also contradicts core American values of freedom and personal responsibility (by monstrous regulations and the sanctioned theft called taxation necessary to run that liberty-infringing racket).

The constitutional nature of the traditional political leftist racket is the Commerce Clause. Without current interpretation of that federal clause, there would be no way that most (if not all usage-based) regulations could possibly survive the Supremacy Clause challenge against state and local legality of liberty-infringing regulations and taxation. President Franklin Roosevelt frustratingly understood that challenge when trying his leftist remedy for the Great Depression prior to that current interpretation (he was constantly judicially rejected prior to the “switch in time that saved nine”).

The constitutional illegality of drugs is also the current interpretation of the Commerce Clause.

According to the public record and pure rationality (obviously required for fair and therefore just law), the Commerce Clause was illegally redefined by the judicial branch of our government (they don’t have the power to change law — judicial activism is illegal). My Liberty Shield endeavor concisely explains the extremely serious Commerce Clause problem. Suffice it to say here that restoring the Commerce Clause instantly ends the war on some drugs outright (like the fall of the Berlin Wall).

For drug policy reform organizations to refuse decoupling their political agenda by sacrificing the most brilliantly powerful strike against the constitutional nature of all drug laws is outrageous, and results in way too many non-rights-infringing (so actually innocent) people suffering right now during that powerfully serious compromise.

Respect Cannabis applies that boldest judicial strike (while preparing for legality by way of responsible entertainment — i.e. interesting and fully honest education), but much more support is now needed to achieve that supremely powerful result against drug prohibition addiction in the true highest court — the court of public opinion — i.e. shining a continuously broadly reaching light sharply upon demonstrably horrific judicial corruption spanning several decades with effectively and journalistically unethically no mainstream media interest.

Drug laws are not “essentially unconstitutional”. They’re outright unconstitutional and Respect Cannabis serves in part to ensure that cannabis culture (e.g. High Times magazine) makes the obviously right fix to greatly expedite ending yet another demonstration of horrible persecution in a nation obligated to uphold the self-evident and unalienable right to liberty.

Trying to find and grow our Respect Cannabis audience is obviously key and terribly challenging due to the coupling of traditional political leftism and drug policy reform. At some point hopefully soon, I will have the means to reach out to libertarians (e.g. those supporting the Ron Paul movement) whom are best aligned with Respect Cannabis goals. Nowhere near enough of them are stumbling upon my journal, despite my best tagging efforts.

Respect Cannabis, in order to promptly stop law madness from reason madness, is strengthening to press against severe Republican (especially Tea Party) hypocrisy on the matter to strongly swing the support pendulum in our favor. Either join us, Republicans, or we will publicly out — via constant entertainment — your severe hypocrisy against most of your principles in this “New Deal” case.

An upcoming post for your weekend reading will go into more detail about the comparison between Republican principles and Certain Drug Prohibition (devastating against traditional political rightist credibility).

Respect Cannabis is not playing around when it comes to justly condemning the war on some drugs on behalf of millions of persecuted victims in the “land of the free”. Our plan is solid, fully rationally backed, and ready to strike hard. All we need is enough reasonable minds (e.g. yours) to understand the need to now support Respect Cannabis (or at least defend your refusal in comments here).

Cannabis informational roots: Respect Cannabis

Scientific Constitutionalism (fully logically combining actual political leftism, American conservatism, and libertarianism) informational roots: Liberty Shield

The reason madness must stop now for public safety.

What’s your position on this?

I am an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an artist working and resting to best carefully contribute towards helping society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest -- all within a sometimes offbeat style of psychedelic artistry.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Liberty Shield, Respect Cannabis

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

my pEarthly and earthly self blended together via the energy of the reality "There are some things so serious you have to laugh at them." – Niels Bohr

Feel free to join us in seamlessly riding our boundless community waves.

Fun through serious, my carefully formed results are honest and usually offer a freshly unique view.

Follow Spirit Wave Journal on WordPress.com
Thank You
Thank you for your undeniably necessary role for (and as part of) my beloved 3Fs (family, friends, and fans).
Help Needed

Helping raise awareness and any other constructive way to participate in our growing community is equally appreciated.

Legal Disclaimer

Spirit Wave (“entertainer” herein) disclaims that entertainer only publicly posts content (“entertainment” herein) for entertainment purposes only. You (the reader of this sentence) agree to the fullest extent permissible by law that entertainer is not liable for any damage. Moreover, entertainer never advocates breaking the law, so any expression involving drug use is addressed solely to anyone capable of lawfully engaging in that use.

%d bloggers like this: