Bitcoin Forum

The tenth amendments delegates the federal governments powers to this amended into the constitution.  Therefor, the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS, IRS, NSA and other federally created tyrannical structures are unconstitutional and have no bearing over the law of the united states.

It took a constitutional amendment to make alcohol illegal and to repeal the amendment once again.  LSD, cannabis, no other drug has received such amendment and is therefor legal by the word of the constitution of the united states.

Anyone who practices against these laws is committing treason and shall be committed and prosecuted by the full extent of law by the will of god.

God's jail is not on earth and the only way you get out is if you ask for forgiveness.  And mean it.  You still have time to do it here, but you must take the will to do so and believe in yourself.

Our wars are unconstitutional and those who wish to continue to assault the lives of others will reach their karma.

To judge me is to judge yourself, pick your fate.

https://soundcloud.com/dankm/stop-the-machine

I believe you are correct, at least as far as the federal government of the US is concerned. I've never seen anything in the Constitution that would lead me to conclude that DC has the authority to make any particular substance illegal. They get away with it because nobody stops them.

Nobody but god.  They will end it now or I will stop them and they can burn in hell and miss out of the infinity of possibilities world peace has to offer.

Umm...ok.

So if drugs are technically legal, why prisons are full of people incriminated for possession of narcotics? Did nobody tell them they are innocent? This is some grand scam of government? Dank?

don't know USA constitutional right, but I think it is possible that not every and each prohibition must be explicitly written in the constitution. This is why it is short , it serves more as a non-exhaustive guide to the infra constitutional framework.

The federal government lacks the authority to outlaw a substance...they do it anyway. The states have the Constitutional authority to outlaw a substance. Most recently we've seen the opposite, with states "legalizing" substances(MJ) and the federal government refusing to recognize the authority of the states to do so. The feds are mistaken.


The Constitution is very specific with regard to the powers of the federal government and specifically states precisely which powers it can wield. All other powers are vested in the states. The federal government of the US was designed to be weak and subservient, but a corrupt monetary system has reversed this and allowed the federal government to expand well beyond Constitutional guidelines. To achieve this terms like "living Constitution" are employed and clauses like general welfare and interstate commerce must be bent out of shape utilizing twisted logic. IOW lawyers have to play word games.

Yes.

Solarion, the states are breaking several amendments by outlawing and imprisoning/assaulting those who use, possess or sell chemicals.

The first amendment protects your right of religion and spirituality.  Psychedelics have been for millennial and are a key tool in spiritual beings.

The eighth amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment.  Imprisoning someone for smoking a plant is inhumane.  Sentencing someone to 100 years in prison for possessing pieces of paper with LSD on them is inhumane, just as it is inhumane to imprison someone who was not found with any LSD and simply used his first amendment right to speak freely of how he has in the past.

The ninth amendment protects rights not enumerated in the constitution.  That means your right as a human being to alter your own consciousness in the way desire.

Drugs are legal federally and within all states.  Those who's actions say otherwise are treasonous tyrants and terrorists and will be prosecuted by the full extent of karmic law.

Interesting thread. I love discussing the Constitution and the rights of U.S. citizens. It is always Very important to know your rights. I am and have been very interested in national and global politics for a while, just recently I finished a Political Science class. Good shit, I recommend it.

While it's true that things are pretty messed up in the bureaucratic systems and we have moved further away from the Constitution, the Constitution itself is vague on most all of today's situations. So in most cases, the Constitution needs to be somewhat interpreted to see how it will apply to that situation. There are many people who are pro-interpretation and many that are die-hard "as it was written" Constitutionalists. What this all boils down to is if there is a case involving subjects that are not explicitly defined in the Constitution, i.e. drugs, what happens is it ends up at the U.S. Supreme Court, where the judges there decide what should/should not be legal according to the Constitution. What they rule in these situations often sets a precedent for future cases, and is usually "assumed" into law.

prescriptive drug are yes legal it depends on the person how they would take the drugs. if overdosing that is already illegal.

depend on drugs...

I think so too

every drug should be legal ,, because nothing kill unless you overdose it ,, overuse it , so if a person dies it shouldn't be government's fault as it was him who overdosed and died , so if you use drugs in limit then it's perfectly ok ,, plus i love weed  8)

Every drug shouldn't be legal. Every drug should be decriminalized and the people selling the drugs get targeted or sell them legally and tax the $ .

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are crystal clear on every major point, but since they're intended to limit centralized authority, and that is seen as unfavorable by federalists, the issues are mucked up until they appear wishy washy.

For example:


This could hardly be more clear, yet we now have "no free speech zones" that the Secret Service can declare on a whim. In Nevada(and elsewhere) "free speech zones" were established for people to protest. This is clearly unconstitutional as the 4th branch of government has no authority to create law. That is the function of Congress and they cannot create a law that infringes freedom of speech.


...again, this is not ambiguous. It's not until you get a whole bunch of scumbag lawyers in a room redefining words like "people" and "Arms" that things get...flexible.
 

When you gave up your guns you gave up the constitution, it's dead.  Nothing can protect what ever the criminals in power feeling like doing... nothing but guns and people with guns behind you.  Nothing will change until we are so desperate we are ready to die for freedom from debt slavery.. any good slaver also knows this and will do everything in their power to ensure the middle class that allows all these horrors to go one continues to have the wealth they have.  For if they lose the middle class the game is up.

Crash a plane into a several buildings and have your population so scared of the wind they will do anything for "protection" it's quite easy to control the masses :S...

Never gave up my guns, nor do I ever intend to. We can all do our part to collapse this sham of a system, just withdraw from it economically. Stop using banks & stop using credit dollars. Store your wealth in non-dollar denominated assets and conduct your affairs in cryptos wherever possible and physical dollars where necessary. Credit is the achilles heel of this particular beast. Starve it and it will die.

If only everyone could do this.. *sigh* /sob

We don't need everyone to do it. We just need to reach critical mass.

The constitution gives us the right to bear arms too, but they're trying to take that away and in some areas (NYC for example) it's borderline impossible to own a firearm regardless.

A document is only as good as the people that believe in, support, and uphold it.