Is this a step toward federal legalization?

jeromanomic

New Member

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
I think it SHOULD make a big difference... let the state-legal businesses do legal banking, it makes sense.

What doesn't make sense is how the government believes it has jurisdiction over anything i want to cultivate to put in my own body, which i am fully capable of doing without infringing anyone's rights. In fact, the government is infringing my constitutionally protected right to do whatever pleases me, with but a single condition: "take no liberty which impinges that of any other."

Putting a seed in the ground, allowing it to flourish, reaping the results of my own toil, and consuming it myself... has nothing to do with anyone else, does not endanger anyone else or their property (or even myself, for that matter), and is literally my right, as a constitutionally protected, free american.

So, ultimately, as long as i'm not buying anything from a black market, or damaging any person or their property... the controlled substances act is an invalid foundation upon which to base any claims to authority over my personally sovereign domain, and especially not sufficient justification for authorization of use of force to impose compliance with an unjust, invalid, unconstitutional "law." In fact, indeed, enforcing such an illegitimate and unconstitutional law, through force, is actually grounds for treason. Every enforcer, judge and/or politician who has facilitated this egregious violation of the fundamental law of this land, is a traitor to this country, and should be immediately removed from their positions, and be charged with treason.
 

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
...anyway, one of the first things that needs to happen, WRT federal legalization, is that they have to admit "schedule 1" is wrong, and has been wrong since the deliberately and maliciously discarded report given to Nixon, who simply hated hippies and wanted to eradicate them. Cannabis should never have been schedule 1 in the first place, and the only reason it stayed that way is because of Nixon.

So that needs undoing.

Then we have to get rid of Michel Leonhart, obsessively anti-cannabis prohibition super-zealot of the DEA. I vote we forcibly hotbox her into compliance. Ideally, the DEA should only be involved in cases of harm reduction/prevention, in such a way as to intervene in dangerous activities... not people growing plants for personal purposes (medical, recreational, small time local trading, etc., should not be their jurisdiction).

Then we need to somehow fix the corruption in both the FDA and NIDA, and DHHS should follow along nicely.

Then we need to repeal the CSA (controlled substances act), on the grounds that it is unconstitutional and therefore invalid. Let people make/own/use all the drugs they want, as long as they don't hurt anyone else in the process. If, and only when, someone does harm someone else in the process, that is the only acceptable scenario in which enforcement of any penalty of any kind, should ever be authorized.

Congress needs to step in and accept the duty to respect our rights and uphold the constitution, which they have repeatedly failed to do, many times in the recent past (perhaps intentionally).

SCOTUS needs to be part of this reformation as well. They need to get in line like everyone else.

Not sure what to do about the states and the private prison racket. It's unethical at best, and... well, abhorrent at worst, but reason should prevail if the right professional argumentative specialist can put them on the spot in a publicly visible way.

Somewhere within all these events, the IRS needs to be audited and have some of their power revoked, like authorization to use deadly force to impose tax compliance. You can't go around threatening people with weapons, to force them to fund their own oppression. Maybe if the laws can be corrected so that the tax system isn't completely fucked, perhaps then they could be allowed enforcement authority. But idk.


We have rights, based upon the foundations of fundamental truths we hold to be self-evident. We reserve these rights, the government must observe these rights, these rights are inalienable and must not be infringed. And as stated in the constitution itself: any abuse of the powers granted to the government, in which officials use their given powers to violate the constitutionally protected rights of the citizens, shall be construed as treason.

What is not quite clear to me, is just how we are supposed to go about charging our own corrupt government officials with treason. Maybe someone can shed some light on that part.
 

LIBERTYCHICKEN

Well-Known Member
It's a step in the right direction but it wont make much of a difference

as it's still not legal

'Under the Heck amendment, the SEC and the Treasury Department will not be able to spend money prosecuting banks for ‘working with pot businesses that do not break state law’. Under these changes, pot will remain a schedule 1 drug, but when it comes to banking, the Federal Government is agreeing to turn a blind eye'

First off the fed's will still be able to spend money to prosecut , just not the SEC and the treasury , Still hundrets of agencys that can charge

second even many legal bussiness are being strong armed out headshops, porn, anything to do with firearms's . If business fall under a certain catagory they will no longer give accounts and their looking for any reason to end active accounts on many legal business
 
Top