Republicans pass a bill to kill our freedoms

[Quantum Windbag]

I wouldn't be too sure about that.

Anyway, the main contention of most people in this thread is that the proposed law would actually regulate activity on foreign soil. It doesn't. It regulates the act of conspiracy, when it takes place on US soil, even if the acts being conspired would take place on foreign soil.

You really should start educating yourself about federal laws before you start thinking a law will not pass just because you think it is stupid.

What You Don

I did NOT say it would not pass, simply because I think it's stupid. Perhaps you should actually READ posts before commenting on them, dipshit.

I said I thought it was stupid, and I also said it would not pass.

I did not say you said it, I said you think it.

 

[Conservative]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

That is answered in your link, and I quote:

The law is a reaction to a 2007 case in which the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals threw out the convictions of two men who planned the transfer of cocaine from a Colombian drug cartel to a Saudi prince for distribution in Europe. Though the men planned the transaction from Miami, the court found that because the cocaine never reached the U.S. and was never intended to reach the U.S., the men hadn't committed any crime against the United States.

Do you always ask questions to which you already know the answer?

Which shows I was correct... the proposed law is in regards to the conspiracy taking place 'within the US', regardless of where the acts themselves take place.

If you conspire within the U.S., to do something that would be illegal if committed with the U.S., and even if that act is committed outside the U.S., this proposed law would allow you to be prosecuted here.

However, if you conspire outside the U.S., to do something that would be illegal if committed with the U.S., and even if that act is committed outside the U.S., this proposed law would not allow you to be prosecuted here.

It's actually pretty simply worded. The text has been posted.

 

[teapartysamurai]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

Can you explain where in the Bill of Rights is the "freedom to be an idiot stoner?"

When you find that, let me know okay?

And the first MORON that gives me the "I have the right to put anything in my body I want, blah blah blah."

Yeah, try that on your pharmacist getting a prescription drug without a prescription. Let me know how well that works.

I also notice that a lot of the same morons that are all for legalizing marijuana (for example) are for all the restrictions on cigarettes.

LOL

 

[frazzledgear]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

You didn't like my response to this bit of idiocy, let's try it this way instead. Exactly where in the Constitution does it guarantee a citizen any "right" to ignore US law if he or she travels outside of the country? Exactly what right or freedom listed in the Bill of Rights do you believe Congress would be violating with this bill? Exactly what FREEDOM do you really think is being infringed upon with this and where in the Constitution have WE THE PEOPLE declared it to be a right and freedom to ignore US law when we travel outside of the country? You seem to believe there is a "freedom" to commit crimes and illegal acts prohibited to US citizens by US law if you just travel to some other country that may be existing in the Dark Ages and still allows it and I fail to find that "right" anywhere. So where is it listed, detailed and explained?

Come on and THINK about what you are saying here! Having it so Americans did NOT have identical and equal rights and freedoms after all would be a HUGE thing -of such importance that a declaration that Americans are NOT equal, that one special class of Americans are a privileged class above all the rest and Americans who are traveling outside of the country have MORE and GREATER rights and freedoms than Americans who stay in the country absolutely would be spelled out SOMEWHERE. So where is the document explaining why and how Americans who travel have greater rights, privileges and freedoms than those who don't?

I'm still trying to grapple with the really stupid notion that you believe traveling outside of the country gives you rights that do not exist for Americans IN the country! How can anyone in their right mind believe Americans who are OUT of the country actually have MORE rights and freedoms than those who are IN the country????? Where is that in the Constitution, where is that spelled out about the privileged class of Americans with more rights than the rest of us? Where does it say Americans get to violate US federal laws with impunity if they just leave the country and commit the crime somewhere else in the world instead? In fact, just discussing this again blows my mind that anyone is really that ignorant as to believe such a preposterous thing!

Americans living IN the country have greater rights than those who do not because traveling to another country automatically puts you under the jurisdiction of TWO countries -and the one with the most restrictive laws, privileges and rights will determine the ones YOU have while outside the country Typically and for obvious reasons that is nearly always the other country -but not in every possible situation.

Travel to Mexico, open your mouth to give a publicly expressed opinion about Mexican politics, politicians or elections? You will go to jail. Go to Iran and walk around with any religious literature except that of Islam and you will go to prison. Go to any country and start working with a drug cartel in a conspiracy to move drugs in or out of any country and you will be charged with a crime under US law even if you don't get charged by the other country as well. Go to another country in order to have sex with a 6 year old kid and you will be charged with a crime under US law even if the country you traveled to is a perverted, scumbag, backwater hellhole of a dump that has not made having sex with a 6 year old illegal! Because that act is illegal for ANY American to commit under US law! The fact you chose to use a 6 year old of some other country is irrelevant! I bet you get that one as well as the one about not getting away with violating any US laws regarding endangered species or sex slavery or terrorism or plots against the US or kidnapping or murder. Its working with others in a conspiracy to engage in criminal activity involving drugs -in other words working for or with a drug cartel -that you think you have a right to do? You as an AMERICAN can't go to another country for the purpose of committing an act that is a federal crime if committed by an American inside the country. No magical "right" exists to do that and your opinion otherwise is just wrong.

Now really what is so difficult to comprehend in all this? Is it REALLY such a big shock to find out that under US law only all Americans have identical rights and freedoms whether they are traveling or at home? Or to find out that Americans who are outside of the country really don't have extra "rights" under US law that don't exist for all the rest of us? Come on -how can you possibly believe Americans traveling outside of the country have a "right" to commit crimes they cannot commit at home as long as they do it in some other country, victimize a different people, prey upon someone else, exploit a different people and for no reason except that some other countries are little more than cesspools existing in the Dark Ages?

I know you cannot appreciate this but this entire thread really says far more about the glaring lack of your own education that you could possibly end up believing Americans traveling outside the country magically possess MORE rights and greater rights than those living IN the country. Wow. Just wow.

 

[LOki]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

Can you explain where in the Bill of Rights is the "freedom to be an idiot stoner?"

When you find that, let me know okay?

9th and 10th Amendments.

And the first MORON that gives me the "I have the right to put anything in my body I want, blah blah blah."

Yeah, try that on your pharmacist getting a prescription drug without a prescription. Let me know how well that works.

Just because your rights are being infringed or violated, it does not follow that you still don't have those rights.

I also notice that a lot of the same morons that are all for legalizing marijuana (for example) are for all the restrictions on cigarettes.

Even if this is true, their hypocrisy doesn't invalidate their valid point.

LOL

Indeed, LOL.

 

[Bfgrn]

How about y'all try thinking for yourselves instead of being told what to think by the media.

People with an IQ over room temperature do not form their opinions based on media reports, particularly when that source is the HuffPuff.

Idiots.

No, only when their 'secret source' is Glenn Beck...

 

[hortysir]

here's the key phrase in the story...

if carried out in the U.S

So, the example below...

"Under this bill, if a young couple plans a wedding in Amsterdam, and as part of the wedding, they plan to buy the bridal party some marijuana, they would be subject to prosecution," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for reforming the country's drug laws.

is incorrect.

According to the OP's source, the acts would have to be carried out in the US. Since this wedding is in Amsterdam, there would be no possibility of prosecution.

The Op itself shows the assertions of the OP to be false.

I love stupid people.

"Under this bill, if a young couple plans a wedding in Amsterdam, and as part of the wedding, they plan to buy the bridal party some marijuana, they would be subject to prosecution," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for reforming the country's drug laws. "The strange thing is that the purchase of and smoking the marijuana while you're there wouldn't be illegal. But this law would make planning the wedding from the U.S. a federal crime."

Is this shit legit?
Huff is often full of Puff

 

[Full-Auto]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

Can you explain where in the Bill of Rights is the "freedom to be an idiot stoner?"

When you find that, let me know okay?

And the first MORON that gives me the "I have the right to put anything in my body I want, blah blah blah."

Yeah, try that on your pharmacist getting a prescription drug without a prescription. Let me know how well that works.

I also notice that a lot of the same morons that are all for legalizing marijuana (for example) are for all the restrictions on cigarettes.

LOL

Where in the bill of rights or anywhere did we give our government the authority to govern us when not in the country? Is your support for thought crimes coming next?

We came together for a common defense not to play nanny for every little thing a person might do.

 

[newpolitics]

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

How is this possible in America?

You didn't like my response to this bit of idiocy, let's try it this way instead. Exactly where in the Constitution does it guarantee a citizen any "right" to ignore US law if he or she travels outside of the country? Exactly what right or freedom listed in the Bill of Rights do you believe Congress would be violating with this bill? Exactly what FREEDOM do you really think is being infringed upon with this and where in the Constitution have WE THE PEOPLE declared it to be a right and freedom to ignore US law when we travel outside of the country? You seem to believe there is a "freedom" to commit crimes and illegal acts prohibited to US citizens by US law if you just travel to some other country that may be existing in the Dark Ages and still allows it and I fail to find that "right" anywhere. So where is it listed, detailed and explained?

Come on and THINK about what you are saying here! Having it so Americans did NOT have identical and equal rights and freedoms after all would be a HUGE thing -of such importance that a declaration that Americans are NOT equal, that one special class of Americans are a privileged class above all the rest and Americans who are traveling outside of the country have MORE and GREATER rights and freedoms than Americans who stay in the country absolutely would be spelled out SOMEWHERE. So where is the document explaining why and how Americans who travel have greater rights, privileges and freedoms than those who don't?

I'm still trying to grapple with the really stupid notion that you believe traveling outside of the country gives you rights that do not exist for Americans IN the country! How can anyone in their right mind believe Americans who are OUT of the country actually have MORE rights and freedoms than those who are IN the country????? Where is that in the Constitution, where is that spelled out about the privileged class of Americans with more rights than the rest of us? Where does it say Americans get to violate US federal laws with impunity if they just leave the country and commit the crime somewhere else in the world instead? In fact, just discussing this again blows my mind that anyone is really that ignorant as to believe such a preposterous thing!

Americans living IN the country have greater rights than those who do not because traveling to another country automatically puts you under the jurisdiction of TWO countries -and the one with the most restrictive laws, privileges and rights will determine the ones YOU have while outside the country Typically and for obvious reasons that is nearly always the other country -but not in every possible situation.

Travel to Mexico, open your mouth to give a publicly expressed opinion about Mexican politics, politicians or elections? You will go to jail. Go to Iran and walk around with any religious literature except that of Islam and you will go to prison. Go to any country and start working with a drug cartel in a conspiracy to move drugs in or out of any country and you will be charged with a crime under US law even if you don't get charged by the other country as well. Go to another country in order to have sex with a 6 year old kid and you will be charged with a crime under US law even if the country you traveled to is a perverted, scumbag, backwater hellhole of a dump that has not made having sex with a 6 year old illegal! Because that act is illegal for ANY American to commit under US law! The fact you chose to use a 6 year old of some other country is irrelevant! I bet you get that one as well as the one about not getting away with violating any US laws regarding endangered species or sex slavery or terrorism or plots against the US or kidnapping or murder. Its working with others in a conspiracy to engage in criminal activity involving drugs -in other words working for or with a drug cartel -that you think you have a right to do? You as an AMERICAN can't go to another country for the purpose of committing an act that is a federal crime if committed by an American inside the country. No magical "right" exists to do that and your opinion otherwise is just wrong.

Now really what is so difficult to comprehend in all this? Is it REALLY such a big shock to find out that under US law only all Americans have identical rights and freedoms whether they are traveling or at home? Or to find out that Americans who are outside of the country really don't have extra "rights" under US law that don't exist for all the rest of us? Come on -how can you possibly believe Americans traveling outside of the country have a "right" to commit crimes they cannot commit at home as long as they do it in some other country, victimize a different people, prey upon someone else, exploit a different people and for no reason except that some other countries are little more than cesspools existing in the Dark Ages?

I know you cannot appreciate this but this entire thread really says far more about the glaring lack of your own education that you could possibly end up believing Americans traveling outside the country magically possess MORE rights and greater rights than those living IN the country. Wow. Just wow.

Wow... just wow.... is there a world constitution? A one-world government? not yet... but this is what you are implying. This is the US constitution, whose powers reside in the US, not the world. It is very simple. You and all of your idealistic and hateful rhetoric doesn't mean anything. i didn't even read your whole post, because it is the same point over and over again, and assumes the whole time that the US can police the globe, and follow its citizens everywhere, and supersede the authority of other countries on the basis that our law and our citizens are more important than theirs, worth more than theirs... this is a very republican state of mind, one that I find unacceptable and immature on a level that is staggering. So, please, spare me your rants. You don't speak truth, as convinced as you may be. You only speak ignorance and hate.

Here's a question: If I were 16 years old, and went to London, should I be allowed to have a beer? US law says I have to be 21, but UK law does not. Do you expect authorities to bust in and card me? No. That is ridiculous. If I go to amsterdam, and I buy a bag of weed, should there be a US right there to bust me? No, there can't be, because US law DOESN'T HAVE JURISDICTION abroad. Cops don't even have the authority to bust a criminal out of their jurisdiction let alone the state or country boarders. What you are implying is so totally asinine and basic in its stupidity, I simply don't know how you convince yourself of your own false righteousness. It's comical to me.

 

[LOki]

You didn't like my response to this bit of idiocy, let's try it this way instead. Exactly where in the Constitution does it guarantee a citizen any "right" to ignore US law if he or she travels outside of the country?

"Idiocy" belongs to the idiot who is even suggesting that the U.S. Constitution has jurisdictional relevance outside of the U.S., it's territories, and holdings.

Exactly what right or freedom listed in the Bill of Rights do you believe Congress would be violating with this bill? Exactly what FREEDOM do you really think is being infringed upon with this and where in the Constitution have WE THE PEOPLE declared it to be a right and freedom to ignore US law when we travel outside of the country? You seem to believe there is a "freedom" to commit crimes and illegal acts prohibited to US citizens by US law if you just travel to some other country that may be existing in the Dark Ages and still allows it and I fail to find that "right" anywhere. So where is it listed, detailed and explained?

WELCOME TO IDIOTVILLE
Population: frazzledgear​

Come on and THINK about what you are saying here! Having it so Americans did NOT have identical and equal rights and freedoms after all would be a HUGE thing -of such importance that a declaration that Americans are NOT equal, that one special class of Americans are a privileged class above all the rest and Americans who are traveling outside of the country have MORE and GREATER rights and freedoms than Americans who stay in the country absolutely would be spelled out SOMEWHERE. So where is the document explaining why and how Americans who travel have greater rights, privileges and freedoms than those who don't?

You clearly have no idea what the term "rights" means. Nor have you any rational notion of what the terms "sovereign" and "jurisdiction" mean.

Seriously. You're just dumb as a stump, right?

I'm still trying to grapple with the really stupid notion that you believe traveling outside of the country gives you rights that do not exist for Americans IN the country!

I'm trying to grapple with the notion that you have the brain power to type and breathe at the same time.

How can anyone in their right mind believe Americans who are OUT of the country actually have MORE rights and freedoms than those who are IN the country?????

How can anyone in their right mind demand that the U.S. government has legal jurisdiction outside of the country.

Seriously, consider the constitutionally valid fact that the U.S. government has limited jurisdiction WITHIN the U.S.

Where is that in the Constitution, where is that spelled out about the privileged class of Americans with more rights than the rest of us? Where does it say Americans get to violate US federal laws with impunity if they just leave the country and commit the crime somewhere else in the world instead?

the laws of the U.S. apply ONLY to acts that occur in the U.S., it's territories, and holdings.

So, if you snort a line of heroin off the tits of an undocumented prostitute in Mumbai, you literally ARE NOT violating ANY U.S. laws.

Only a retard could fail to grasp this patently obvious fact of reality.

In fact, just discussing this again blows my mind that anyone is really that ignorant as to believe such a preposterous thing!

WELCOME TO IDIOTVILLE
Population: frazzledgear
Tourist Attraction: The retard that retards point and laugh at.​

Preposterous is the notion that U.S. laws should have any general bearing AT ALL upon what is legal and/or illegal in other countries.

Americans living IN the country have greater rights than those who do not because traveling to another country automatically puts you under the jurisdiction of TWO countries -and the one with the most restrictive laws, privileges and rights will determine the ones YOU have while outside the country Typically and for obvious reasons that is nearly always the other country -but not in every possible situation.

Travel to Mexico,

--MORE PATENTLY RETARDED WOWSING SNIP'D--​

I know you cannot appreciate this but this entire thread really says far more about the glaring lack of your own education that you could possibly end up believing Americans traveling outside the country magically possess MORE rights and greater rights than those living IN the country. Wow. Just wow.

You are just the shining star of stupid in my day today. You clearly have no rational idea what the terms "rights," "sovereign," and "jurisdiction" mean. Your little rant regarding how shit works when you're the foreigner, is patently ludicrous in it's demands that acts committed outside the jurisdiction of U.S. law can be considered violations of U.S. law, and it is entirely ignorant of the notion of the existence of international law. It is submitted as if it was patently legitimate that a foreign nation should exercise sovereign legal power in this country. It's as retarded as you are.

 

[Conservative]

here's the key phrase in the story...

if carried out in the U.S

So, the example below...
is incorrect.

According to the OP's source, the acts would have to be carried out in the US. Since this wedding is in Amsterdam, there would be no possibility of prosecution.

The Op itself shows the assertions of the OP to be false.

I love stupid people.

"Under this bill, if a young couple plans a wedding in Amsterdam, and as part of the wedding, they plan to buy the bridal party some marijuana, they would be subject to prosecution," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for reforming the country's drug laws. "The strange thing is that the purchase of and smoking the marijuana while you're there wouldn't be illegal. But this law would make planning the wedding from the U.S. a federal crime."

Is this shit legit?
Huff is often full of Puff

Right. I corrected my earliest posts later on... in this example, planning the wedding here would be punishable, while planning it in Amsterdam would not... regardless of the fact the wedding was in Amsterdam.

 

[Conservative]

it needs repeating... apparently...

the text of the proposed law (linked and posted earlier). is very specific.

The conspiring 'within the US' to commit acts, even if said acts would take place outside the US, would be punishable if said acts would be illegal in the US.

They are NOT punishing the acts themselves, since they would take place outside the US in the example... they are punishing the conspiracy IF, and ONLY IF said conspiracy takes place within the US.

If I go to Amsterdam, and plan to distribute crack in Belgium, the proposed law would not have any power against me. If I was within the US and made plans to distribute crack I buy in Amsteram, in Belgium, then the paw would allow me to be prosecuted here, since the planning took place here in the US.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

it needs repeating... apparently...

the text of the proposed law (linked and posted earlier). is very specific.

The conspiring 'within the US' to commit acts, even if said acts would take place outside the US, would be punishable if said acts would be illegal in the US.

They are NOT punishing the acts themselves, since they would take place outside the US in the example... they are punishing the conspiracy IF, and ONLY IF said conspiracy takes place within the US.

If I go to Amsterdam, and plan to distribute crack in Belgium, the proposed law would not have any power against me. If I was within the US and made plans to distribute crack I buy in Amsteram, in Belgium, then the paw would allow me to be prosecuted here, since the planning took place here in the US.

You can see a way to defend it, but you think it will not actually pass. Why is that?

 

[The Gadfly]

Because drugs are bad when not dispensed by the proper authorities, as with all things in modern America only the well to do, through their physician, are allowed to escape reality for brief moments.


"Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies. We provide the evidence on each of eleven different health and social problems: physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being. For all eleven of these health and social problems, outcomes are very substantially worse in more unequal societies." Richard Wilkinson/Kate Pickett The Evidence in Detail | The Equality Trust

Really? Surely you don't mean to suggest that can't be accomplished with perfectly legal substances (like alcohol)? No, Midcan, I think you're just upset that your recreational drug of choice isn't available legally.

 

[Conservative]

it needs repeating... apparently...

the text of the proposed law (linked and posted earlier). is very specific.

The conspiring 'within the US' to commit acts, even if said acts would take place outside the US, would be punishable if said acts would be illegal in the US.

They are NOT punishing the acts themselves, since they would take place outside the US in the example... they are punishing the conspiracy IF, and ONLY IF said conspiracy takes place within the US.

If I go to Amsterdam, and plan to distribute crack in Belgium, the proposed law would not have any power against me. If I was within the US and made plans to distribute crack I buy in Amsteram, in Belgium, then the paw would allow me to be prosecuted here, since the planning took place here in the US.

You can see a way to defend it, but you think it will not actually pass. Why is that?

I'm not defending it. I'm stating facts about it. If I was defending it, I'd have said it was a good idea and would sail through easily. People are all up in arms over rights being taken away, actions in other countries being punishable here, etc. None of that happens in this proposal. There are a lot more important issues for me to worry about, defend, attack, etc, than the 'perception' of people who simple did not actually READ the text, and instead decided to go on about a talking point.

 

[Moonglow]

if they go world wide does that mean the CIA will have to stop dealing and growing drugs?

 

[editec]

Conspiracy laws are terrifying.

Once we grant governments the right to decide that a conspiracy is crime, even if no other crime happens?

We have basically abandoned any hope of being a free people.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

it needs repeating... apparently...

the text of the proposed law (linked and posted earlier). is very specific.

The conspiring 'within the US' to commit acts, even if said acts would take place outside the US, would be punishable if said acts would be illegal in the US.

They are NOT punishing the acts themselves, since they would take place outside the US in the example... they are punishing the conspiracy IF, and ONLY IF said conspiracy takes place within the US.

If I go to Amsterdam, and plan to distribute crack in Belgium, the proposed law would not have any power against me. If I was within the US and made plans to distribute crack I buy in Amsteram, in Belgium, then the paw would allow me to be prosecuted here, since the planning took place here in the US.

You can see a way to defend it, but you think it will not actually pass. Why is that?

I'm not defending it. I'm stating facts about it. If I was defending it, I'd have said it was a good idea and would sail through easily. People are all up in arms over rights being taken away, actions in other countries being punishable here, etc. None of that happens in this proposal. There are a lot more important issues for me to worry about, defend, attack, etc, than the 'perception' of people who simple did not actually READ the text, and instead decided to go on about a talking point.

I am up in arms about the ever increasing scope of federal power, which, despite your misconceptions, always comes at the expense of freedom.

 

[Hum Dinger]

Under the Bush Doctorine, this would give us the authority to preemptively invade any nation that has drug laws that are more liberal than our own.

We must protect our citizens from themselves!

 

[GogUndMagog]

America= the Fourth Reich.