Prompted by “Groundbreaking Legislation Would Abolish Federal Sentences for Drug Crimes”: http://www.hightimes.com/read/groundbreaking-legislation-would-abolish-federal-sentences-drug-crimes
“A group of national lawmakers are working to eliminate the use of the federal prison system for minor drug offenders…”
I can’t argue with the undeniably brilliant value of that elimination, so one hand welcomes that legislative passage.
“The bill, which is called the ‘Safe, Accountable, Fair, and Effective (SAFE) Justice Act of 2015,’ would begin to chip away at the federal prison crisis across the nation—a problem that has manifested over a 500-percent upsurge in incarceration rates over the past few decades. The goal of the latest measure is to do away with federal sentences for minor drug possession by allowing those cases to be dealt with on a state-by-state basis.”
And we all know the states will likely remain tough in this regard. Being judicially caught with LSD, for prime example, is still likely ruinous.
By the way, when someone argues legalization is all about the “right to get high”…
“‘Taxpayers will pour $6.9 billion into the Bureau of Prisons this year, with substantial increases each year into the foreseeable future unless Congress fixes the system,’ former U.S. Representative Newt Gingrich and political activist Pat Nolan wrote in The Washington Times. ‘The inspector general of the Department of Justice has said that this level of spending is “unsustainable.” Federal prisons are squeezing out spending for counterterrorism agencies, victim services, the FBI, and other important crime-fighting initiatives.'”
Law enforcement resources (as well as taxpayer resources) are precious, so recklessly expending them on objectively harmless drug possession makes no civilized sense, while murderers/rapists/thieves/etc. roam freely.
“Perhaps most importantly, this bill would ensure that citizens who buy drugs on the black market would no longer be in violation of federal law. Offenders would simply be held accountable under the statutes of their respective state.”
Of course, any scientific constitutionalist understands this whole song and dance is pure governmental rubbish.
While we can celebrate Oregon becoming the next state with recreational cannabis legality, we cannot celebrate the truly horrific state of law in our land and the roughly millions of people still negatively impacted from the horrors of Certain Drug Prohibition (whom will be impacted as such for many generations to come at this terribly slow and unnecessary pace).
Meanwhile, the Commerce Clause was definitely illegally redefined (the public record confirms it) — and that new definition is the sole constitutional basis for the war on some drugs. Restoring that clause by necessity means instantly ending the Controlled Substances Act, so an outright end of corrupt law to end Certain Drug Prohibition at the federal level (no legislative process needed while many people suffer).
The real problem here is an excessively apathetic public. That either comes from simple unawareness of that blatantly illegal redefining (arguably ignited in a desperate effort to fix damage from the Great Depression — see President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal”, by the way), or outright corrupt political motives in the “land of the free”.
Challenging the effective judicial conclusion also illegally disarming the ninth constitutional amendment (“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people.”) is also publicly needed. Without judicial recognition of the fundamental and unalienable right to liberty, that amendment serves literally no purpose (which is clearly insane), and I challenge any judicial representative out there to show us how anyone can possibly successfully leverage that amendment today to win even one case.
“Now is the time for conservatives to lead the charge.”
Severe Republican hypocrisy in this Certain Drug Prohibition case is terribly obvious. The illegal redefining of the Commerce Clause from hardcore political leftist Franklin Roosevelt is how traditional political leftism pours throughout legislative society against the definition of American liberty (including grossly expanding regulatory complexity against Republic principles and beyond).
Far more expeditiously ending the war on some drugs is actually quite simple. Strongly, continuously, and publicly expose Republican hypocrisy in this case, which is one main facet of my Respect Cannabis campaign towards proper intentional perception alteration.
Ending Republic opposition to ‘certain drug’ legalization at all levels of government would greatly facilitate ending the suffering of millions of non-violent people, while also facilitating real drug use/abuse education to minimize harm (i.e. improve public safety).
Unlike the proposed legislation, wielding actual constitutionality to end the demonstrably disastrous war on some drugs would be a serious financial blow against criminal organizations of all sizes. The huge profit margin from cheaply making drugs and selling them at high prices due solely to black market forces (a margin that doesn’t exist elsewhere in criminal sales) would also be a serious boost to public safety (including the safety of law enforcement members facing small gangs with military grade weapons purchased from that huge profit).
Consider my journal postings on the subject a continuous challenge to Republicans upholding the war on some drugs (including all presidential candidates), and an invitation to scientific constitutionalists to find Republican debate areas and firmly challenge them on their turf to publicly expose such outrageous hypocrisy — by humiliation, as sadly likely needed during the brilliant dance of the necessary (restoring judicial sanity for public safety in the “land of the free” and “home of the brave”).