Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
When you apply for security clearance they give you a lie detector test. It's a stupid move to fire some of these people. My sister graduated salutatorian in her class in pre med and valedictorian in med school. I doubt she spent one second in school where did not have a buzz. I know some nuclear physicists that are stoned out of their mind most the time. Lol. What's worse is they spin uranium most the day.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
When you apply for security clearance they give you a lie detector test. It's a stupid move to fire some of these people. My sister graduated salutatorian in her class in pre med and valedictorian in med school. I doubt she spent one second in school where did not have a buzz. I know some nuclear physicists that are stoned out of their mind most the time. Lol. What's worse is they spin uranium most the day.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
Talking about our age. It is kinda funny most the people that on here and a high percentage of people that vote are old. How much do laws really effect us anymore? It's really the young that have to live with the long term effects of them. Life is strange. In a lot of ways I am beyond caring also. At my age I might as well do what the hell I want. Aint really that much any one can really take from me.When you apply for security clearance they give you a lie detector test. It's a stupid move to fire some of these people. My sister graduated salutatorian in her class in pre med and valedictorian in med school. I doubt she spent one second in school where did not have a buzz. I know some nuclear physicists that are stoned out of their mind most the time. Lol. What's worse is they spin uranium most the day.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
It just makes Biden and his admin. look bad trying to placate a minority of people who think smoking a joint is the end of the world! The people they're worried about accepted true criminal and sociopathic lying by Trump and his people, but there's this need to weed out the "stoners!" I'm so embarrassed for the whole country! We're just pathetic human beings! Lucky I'm a senior and just don't GAF anymore! I can't and keep my sanity with a society that fks itself over like this!
> Either the government has total power to regulate what you consume, and to decide what's good and bad, or they have no power to do that. There can't be an in between. So which do you think it is? All, or none?
I am sorry, but I do not agree with the premise of the question, and I have fully stated my opinion with the prior post about Article 1, Section 8, which I think contradicts your premise.
> To make all laws necessary for carrying into execution the foregoing powers.... not to make any law they wish or to assume any power they wish. Try again. Which enumerated power, which of the "foregoing Powers" or other powers vested by the Constitution gives them the power to tell us what we can and cannot ingest into our body.
I posted the exact text, verbatim. See ya.
The Constitution of the United States of America said:The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
A law being stupid doesn't make it unconstitutional. Alcohol could have been banned via legislation, they used the amendment process because they knew it was the only way to prevent an immediate pushback. The Dry side's hope was to outlast the Wet counterstrike by making it harder to overturn, and hoping time would prove them right.
Read Rockerfeller's letter on his position on Prohibition for a view into their reasons behind it, and his reason for deciding it wasn't worth it.
Removing it from Schedule I would be the start of admitting the war on drugs has been at best a push, at worst a failure.
Which enumerated power would give Congress the right to ban alcohol or marijuana?
>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
no they got fired because they were stupid and admitted they smoked weed voluntarilyThere are things you just don't admit.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
Bingo. Employers don't want to hear that you are loaded on grass , particularly in writing when the applicant is applying for a gig in someplace like the WH.
The insurance company doesn't want to pay the claim if you get wasted on some bad ganja trip in the Oval Office and accidentally fall on the Red Nuclear button.
I'm surprised that modern young people couldn't figure this out for themselves. There is a reason that neither Cheech nor Chong were ever appointed to high office by previous libs.
Like when your Dr asks you how much you drink or if there is a gun in your house
If they aren't making you piss in a cup then even the Feebs won't be able to prove anythingIf you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
If you're stupid enough to lie to the FBI about this, you deserve to be fired. Just ask General Flynn what happens when you lie to the FBI.
That's exactly the attitude that got these fools fired in the first place. Those who do not learn from their mistakes, are condemned to repeat them.
When you apply for security clearance they give you a lie detector test. It's a stupid move to fire some of these people. My sister graduated salutatorian in her class in pre med and valedictorian in med school. I doubt she spent one second in school where did not have a buzz. I know some nuclear physicists that are stoned out of their mind most the time. Lol. What's worse is they spin uranium most the day.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
It just makes Biden and his admin. look bad trying to placate a minority of people who think smoking a joint is the end of the world! The people they're worried about accepted true criminal and sociopathic lying by Trump and his people, but there's this need to weed out the "stoners!" I'm so embarrassed for the whole country! We're just pathetic human beings! Lucky I'm a senior and just don't GAF anymore! I can't and keep my sanity with a society that fks itself over like this!
what drug is that?>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
what drug is that?>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
Harris herself stated she smokes dope. Now what?Well you do have Harris in the White House who fought to put people in prison over this.
Basically though, most of the rest of them simply lied.
> Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
what drug is that?>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
Meth is made from regular cold meds'
DEA Says New Cold Medicine Can be Used to Make Meth
> Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
While that is true of people moving to heroin after prescription opioid addiction, I have not heard the same about meth.
When I was on jury duty, we had more than one meth head brought in to testify. Some were in orange jumpsuits and chains. They were a physical and psychological mess. They discussed how meth quickly destroyed their lives, going from having a career and owning a home to a life of homelessness, prostitution, and other crimes.
It all started for them as one night of partying, with meth helping them stay up all night. 18 months later, they are in orange jumpsuits and chains, and testifying in a federal case.
There is zero chance that I would ever support legalization for drugs like meth.
Regards,
Jim
what drug is that?>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
Meth is made from regular cold meds'
DEA Says New Cold Medicine Can be Used to Make Meth
over the counter cold meds not prescription
You link says it would cost $200-$250 to make a single dose (typically 0.1-0.25g) of meth. You can make two ounces (56 g) for that price. I really don't think meth heads typically have money to burn. Your entire argument is not really credible, sorry.> Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
While that is true of people moving to heroin after prescription opioid addiction, I have not heard the same about meth.
When I was on jury duty, we had more than one meth head brought in to testify. Some were in orange jumpsuits and chains. They were a physical and psychological mess. They discussed how meth quickly destroyed their lives, going from having a career and owning a home to a life of homelessness, prostitution, and other crimes.
It all started for them as one night of partying, with meth helping them stay up all night. 18 months later, they are in orange jumpsuits and chains, and testifying in a federal case.
There is zero chance that I would ever support legalization for drugs like meth.
Regards,
Jim
As my link shows, meth is already legal in less potent forms.
Nobody tried to blame this in any one but Biden in this line of convo.When you apply for security clearance they give you a lie detector test. It's a stupid move to fire some of these people. My sister graduated salutatorian in her class in pre med and valedictorian in med school. I doubt she spent one second in school where did not have a buzz. I know some nuclear physicists that are stoned out of their mind most the time. Lol. What's worse is they spin uranium most the day.If you're stupid enough to volunteer that you smoke a little weed then you deserve to get fired.
It just makes Biden and his admin. look bad trying to placate a minority of people who think smoking a joint is the end of the world! The people they're worried about accepted true criminal and sociopathic lying by Trump and his people, but there's this need to weed out the "stoners!" I'm so embarrassed for the whole country! We're just pathetic human beings! Lucky I'm a senior and just don't GAF anymore! I can't and keep my sanity with a society that fks itself over like this!
To try and blame this on Republicans or Trump supporters is a total cop out. Harris as a prosecutor had been no different than any of them.
Biden is doing this. Period. He does not have to.
You link says it would cost $200-$250 to make a single dose (typically 0.1-0.25g) of meth. You can make two ounces (56 g) for that price. I really don't think meth heads typically have money to burn. Your entire argument is not really credible, sorry.> Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
While that is true of people moving to heroin after prescription opioid addiction, I have not heard the same about meth.
When I was on jury duty, we had more than one meth head brought in to testify. Some were in orange jumpsuits and chains. They were a physical and psychological mess. They discussed how meth quickly destroyed their lives, going from having a career and owning a home to a life of homelessness, prostitution, and other crimes.
It all started for them as one night of partying, with meth helping them stay up all night. 18 months later, they are in orange jumpsuits and chains, and testifying in a federal case.
There is zero chance that I would ever support legalization for drugs like meth.
Regards,
Jim
As my link shows, meth is already legal in less potent forms.
> Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.>Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.Generally the federal government actions towards Cannabis/Hemp has been an overreaching and unconstitutional violation of everything our Constitution stands for. It was originally passed in smoke filled back room with party bosses. No input from the medical community, farmers, or practically any of the citizens their new "Prohibition Law" would effect. It was also a power grab by Congress. It took a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit Alcohol nation wide, but not with the Cannabis/Hemp plant and products.
The war on Americans who smoke pot(or engage in any type of non compliant recreational substance use) has been the whipping boy for both parties. It's been a winning strategy. Who's going to stand up for the "Druggies"?
Anyone who supports the Constitution, any so-called conservative, should be standing up for the druggies. We used to day, and some still say it while not really meaning it, I hate what you say (or do) but I'll fight to the death do defend your right to say (or do) it. Those are empty words today.
It's an interesting point, but some drugs are plain bad, like meth. Some can be used in moderation, and it is arguable whether or not occasional recreational use off the job is an issue - everyone has their own opinions, and not every job is the same.
Regarding constitutionality, it is completely constitutional to restrict behaviors that the citizens, via their legislatures, consider to be undesirable, unless it conflicts with a fundamental right like freedom of expression, assembly, religion, arms, and such.
You claiming religion or expression
Meth is pretty much just a concentrated form of the drug your doctor gives you. Doctors are a large reason people get hooked on Meth.
While that is true of people moving to heroin after prescription opioid addiction, I have not heard the same about meth.
When I was on jury duty, we had more than one meth head brought in to testify. Some were in orange jumpsuits and chains. They were a physical and psychological mess. They discussed how meth quickly destroyed their lives, going from having a career and owning a home to a life of homelessness, prostitution, and other crimes.
It all started for them as one night of partying, with meth helping them stay up all night. 18 months later, they are in orange jumpsuits and chains, and testifying in a federal case.
There is zero chance that I would ever support legalization for drugs like meth.
Regards,
Jim
