|
 Clean
gifts from Jamba
 
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
 Drug War Scam (video)
#7098664 - 06/27/07 12:42 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, we all know the so called 'war on drugs' is stupid.
But do we know, factually, WHY drug charges really have no legal basis, and are just a huge scam being perpetrated by the real criminals who are hiding behind names like "The State"?
If you or someone who you know has been slapped with drug charges you should really watch this as many times as it takes for you to understand it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=198325969631851603&q=adventures+in+legal+land
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7099312 - 06/27/07 03:20 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
could a moderator move this to the law forum?
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
 OneMoreRobot3021
punky jewster
Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 56,599
Loc: new york shitty
Last seen: 5 hours, 21 minutes
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7099323 - 06/27/07 03:22 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I would, but then Phred would move it to the Drug Policy Reform forum, so I'll move it there instead.
--------------------
The Drug Policy Alliance  Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies
"The psychedelic experience - it has a tremendous force to revivify the spirit, particularly because it is not an ideology. It is not something someone 'figured out.' It is an EXPERIENCE. And this is important to bear in mind." - McKenna.
"We're not mad, we're just doing what we want. You rigid thinkers can't recognize the healthy sanity of that." - Harlan Ellison, "Crackpots"
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
|
thanks. top notch moderating, well done! 
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
The Crow
Registered: 04/03/07
Posts: 1,774
Loc: giving birth
Last seen: 7 months, 9 days
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7105593 - 06/28/07 11:21 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
wow-excellent
how do you spell that element of crime thing- corpus calacti?
I'll be sure to remember this.....profound....
--------------------
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: The Crow]
#7160401 - 07/11/07 11:32 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
it's corpus delicti - latin for "body of crime"
the meat and bones of the thing
law students, take heed!
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
Economist
in training
Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7164776 - 07/12/07 03:12 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, this is a total load of bull. If you bought into it, you're probably not aware of the legal construct of negative culpability resulting from unjustified risk (which is odd, because it's in American Jurisprudence, yet he never brings it up...).
Now, before you start with "that's a load of corrupt legal crap!" think about this:
1) If you are not criminally culpable for harm resulting from unjustifiable risk, then no one would ever be guilty of criminally negligent manslaughter. Your boss at your place of work wouldn't have to install hand-rails or sheathes for spinning blades or anything "safety minded". Hell, he could hang a sword from a thin thread directly above your chair, and there'd be nothing, legally, you could do about it.
2) If you are not criminally culpable for harm resulting from unjustifiable risk, then drunk driving shouldn't be illegal.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,329
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7174675 - 07/14/07 12:00 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
But do we know, factually, WHY drug charges really have no legal basis...
Yes, they have no legal basis because they are a violation of an individual's right to (a) decide what they put into their own body, & (b) pursue life & happiness how they so desire.
On a side note... isn't it so ironic when you hear some fascist zombie recite propaganda like, "We have to fight [insert name(s) of current evil-doers] to defend our freedoms!". Ask these morons, "What freedoms?" Ask them how 'freedom' exists in a nation with the largest prison population in the world; a nation that has arrested, charged, & incarcerated tens of millions of people for exercising the fundamental freedom of making the choice as to what they put into their own body & what state of mind/feeling of body they wish to attain.
If one believes in true freedom, not a propaganda-packaged definition dictated by the ruling political/economic classes, then the U.S. has the largest population of political prisoners in the world; it is a far greater example of fascism than of freedom.
--------------------
"Every part of this earth is sacred to my people. Every pine needle, every sandy shore, every humming insect is holy... We are part of the earth and it is part of us... The earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth." - Chief Seattle
"...the role our nation has taken... of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments... we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values... When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered." - Martin Luther King Jr.
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7187661 - 07/17/07 11:43 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Not sure I follow...
Are you assuming that drug use is putting someone besides the user at risk? I could imagine some examples of this. But if drug use is putting no one at risk besides the user (and perceived "risk" is debatable) where is the crime?
What is the "unjustifiable risk" in someone growing cannabis in private?
Why does this "legal construct" provide an excuse to prosecute people who aren't hurting another person?
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
Economist
in training
Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7198484 - 07/19/07 03:36 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Clean said:
Are you assuming that drug use is putting someone besides the user at risk? I could imagine some examples of this. But if drug use is putting no one at risk besides the user (and perceived "risk" is debatable) where is the crime?
I am not stating that drug use puts someone besides the user at risk. I am stating that United States legal frameworks contain an established foundation for drug charges. The video makes the case that no such framework exists, I am point out that is incorrect.
Quote:
Clean said:
What is the "unjustifiable risk" in someone growing cannabis in private?
Why does this "legal construct" provide an excuse to prosecute people who aren't hurting another person?
I never said it did, please do not put words in my mouth.
The video maker has set up a claim that is clearly false: that there is no established legal framework for drug charges.
The problem lies in what constitutes "unjustifiable risk". Currently the law includes several "dangers" that are classified as "unjustifiable" which I personally disagree with. Current water and soil pollution regulations in several venues come to mind. Unfortunately, society disagrees with me, and so we have laws I dislike, but nonetheless are legally justifiable.
Similarly, I disagree with current drug legislation, but that does not mean there is "no legal basis" for it. There is a legal basis for it, and we need to put out focus on changing the attitudes of voters, rather than placing false hopes in incorrect and selective interpretations of American Jurisprudence.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,329
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7199051 - 07/19/07 06:13 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
What is the legal basis for criminalizing hemp, something even the 'founding fathers' grew & understood its value & benefits?
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7199739 - 07/19/07 08:40 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Would you say his point about corpus dilecti is valid?
--------------------
With balance, there is progress.
|
Economist
in training
Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7200956 - 07/20/07 01:45 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Clean said:
Would you say his point about corpus dilecti is valid?
No, it is a completely invalid point because it ignores significant portions of established legal construct in American Jurisprudence.
Hell, he even defines the phrase incorrectly. Black's Law Dictionary (6th ed.) defines "corpus delicti" as: "the fact of a crime having been actually committed."
Now, if holding drugs is a crime, and you are holding drugs, that IS corpus delicti, the fact of the crime has been proven. Corpus delicti simply means that you cannot have a conviction if there is no crime, it DOES NOT describe in any way shape or form what a crime can or cannot be.
What he's actually trying to describe is more likes "Actus Reus", which Black's Law Dictionary defines as: '[t]he `guilty act.' A wrongful deed which renders the actor criminally liable if combined with mens rea.
And mens rea means: surprise surprise, "the guilty mind".
He'd be better off if he suggested that there was no "guilt" in using a drug where the only person who was affected by the drug was the user.
This argument, however, is moot because common law dating back to the 1800s has found that Criminal Negligence (associated with "unjustifiable risk) is a crime.(America accused Britain of practising Criminal Negligence by safeguarding Confederate Ships during the American Civil War)
So there you have it: if the American people believe that using drugs constitutes an unjustifiable risk, and they pass laws against it, those laws are very real and legally binding. The creator of this video has no feet to stand on, and cannot even accurately define his terminology.
This should also answer EntheogenicPeace's question: the legal basis for outlawing hemp is simply that the American People believe growing it to be an unjustifiable risk. You do not have to agree with them, but until you change enough of their minds, the law stands: there is no part of American Jurisprudence that invalidates it.
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7219005 - 07/24/07 05:04 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
"Legality" aside....
Factually, "the American people" have never created a law or passed one.
I don't remember the last time we had nation wide legislation authoring conferences where we all collaborated on a new law.
A group of people claiming to be representative of "the American people" are the ones who actually do those things.
At most these people only really represent the people who actually voted for them. And even then, how many of those people are actually keeping tabs on what their so called "representative" is doing day to day, bill to bill, to make sure they are being accurately represented?
As we all know millions of Americans don't vote at all. So it can hardly be said that any body of 'elected' representatives can "represent the American people".
The only way that statement could be considered true would be if American citizenship was predicated on the act of voting.
Though the people in this country may go along with the whole scheme, that doesn't mean that the "representatives" are in fact representing anyone 100% or even 50% of the time.
The claim "I represent this body of people" is a MIGHTY claim to make. There had better be evidence that every single person they claim to represent is satisfied or else they should not make that claim, period. I don't care what the Constitution or any "law" document says about the matter, I want to see the facts.
Edited by Clean (07/25/07 09:01 PM)
|
Economist
in training
Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7226325 - 07/26/07 12:06 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
You are attempting to make a claim which you cannot hope to back-up.
I would argue that the millions of Americans who do not vote, do so because they are simply indifferent to the system. If you are indifferent, then you defacto support the current system because you do not care enough to change it.
If the millions of voters who do not vote do not care enough to change the system, then it is incorrect to claim that they do not support anti-drug laws. The reality is that they are indifferent to them. They don't care one way or the other. You cannot claim that representatives of government do not represent these people, because they do not have a point to represent. Individuals who do not vote are essentially saying "I don't care what you do..." and thus defacto support the representatives that have passed anti-drug laws.
If the average non-voter really did disagree with anti-drug laws, don't you think they'd be out there voting Libertarian, Green, or whatever in order to end the drug war?
|
The Crow
Registered: 04/03/07
Posts: 1,774
Loc: giving birth
Last seen: 7 months, 9 days
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7230864 - 07/27/07 02:55 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
parties have little to do with it. Ron Paul wants to legalize and he's a Republican
--------------------
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,329
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7233364 - 07/28/07 11:13 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If the average non-voter really did disagree with anti-drug laws, don't you think they'd be out there voting Libertarian, Green, or whatever in order to end the drug war?
That is, sadly, the truth.
|
Clean
gifts from Jamba
Registered: 05/11/03
Posts: 2,278
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Economist]
#7264104 - 08/05/07 09:41 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I agree that there are plenty of Americans who are indifferent and thereby supportive. Some of them probably even vote just for the fun of it (and the excuse to get off work, if they're lucky)
Quote:
Individuals who do not vote are essentially saying "I don't care what you do..." and thus defacto support the representatives that have passed anti-drug laws.
Not entirely true. I know there are people who don't vote for any candidates precisely because they care very much. So much that they cry sometimes wondering why so many people put up with such shabby "leadership" and outright criminality by officials.
They dislike every candidate put before them, and feel it goes against their convictions to vote for the person who fits their perception as being the least evil. They want and work towards serious change that can only be realized by actually living the ideals (such as non-violence, and locally focused economy), instead of electing someone else in the hope that person will get it done if they are e-mailed enough by the constituents.
|
leery11
Registered: 06/24/05
Posts: 4,839
Last seen: 26 days, 14 hours
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7267446 - 08/06/07 06:53 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
indeed,
people are spellbound by the lesser of two evils, failing to realize that the greater evil is Satan's right hand, and the lesser evil his left.
this is because they listen to the news, which speaks to them without them being able to speak back.
--------------------
Om
|
elbisivni
is dead
Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 2,066
|
Re: Drug War Scam (video) [Re: Clean]
#7274944 - 08/08/07 04:06 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The minute this guy started talking I was thinking to myself "I hope to the God I don't necessarily believe in that this guy doesn't do drugs," and then he says it!
This is what is needed - intelligent, unbiased and non-using individuals who see the truth of the matter, take up interest in it, do the research and voice their opinion. Average Joe, but individual and intelligent, telling people in a straight-forward manner, focusing on individual rights, why these things are unconstitutional. Not because they want their drugs to be legal.. but because they want to preserve the freedom written of upon the very piece of paper that the rulers of this country abuse to such a criminally offensive degree that they only permit its adherence when it is to be used for advancement within their own private interests.
Freedom is slowly being put to rest by masses of unseen and well-positioned men motivated ONLY by self-interest and greed.
It doesn't take a person who uses drugs to see the mass error in virtually all of the logic behind the drug war as it is seen from the publics' point of view.
--------------------
superstition
1: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation
2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary
|
|
login or 
register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
