News (Media Awareness Project) - US WY: PUB LTE: Dictatorship By Inaction |
Title: | US WY: PUB LTE: Dictatorship By Inaction |
Published On: | 2010-05-16 |
Source: | Casper Star-Tribune (WY) |
Fetched On: | 2010-05-23 00:45:59 |
DICTATORSHIP BY INACTION
Editor:
In the April 20 issue of the CS-T there was an article about a man in
Colorado who was busted by the feds for growing medical marijuana
even though he was licensed by the state to do so. Events like this
raise some very important constitutional questions.
First off, whatever happened to the 10th Amendment? You see, the 10th
was supposed to act like a wall of separation between direct federal
rule and the citizens of each of the states. The only power the feds
had when it came to the states was to regulate international trade
and to rule on the constitutionality of state laws. In order for
federal law to supersede state law, there should be a constitutional
amendment repealing the 10th. I don't think the 14th is that
amendment, by the way.
Now when it comes to anti-pot/drug laws, didn't it take a
constitutional amendment to bring about the failed alcohol
prohibition? So where is the amendment giving the feds the power to
regulate pot/drugs? There is none.
Did you know that the original anti-pot/drug legislation came in the
form of taxes like the Harrison Tax Act of 1917 or the Marijuana Tax
Act of 1937? So why do we think this was the case? Could it be that
forbidding the use by law of any intoxicants would have violated the
Constitution? This was of course at a time when the legal boundaries
set by the Constitution were respected. Nowadays politicians spend
their time trying to skirt around it. The perfect example are the
anti-pot/drug laws. This makes laws like these far more dangerous to
the very fabric of our nation than the pot/drug laws they're supposed
to protect us from.
What makes these laws so dangerous is that they set precedents, that
then makes it easier to pass more constitutional skirting laws. This
is the main reason we're all losing so many of our rights and
freedoms. It's laws like these that should no longer be tolerated --
or the politicians that pass them -- or else we're going to see a
dictatorship as a result of inaction on your part.
JOE DePAUL, Casper
Editor:
In the April 20 issue of the CS-T there was an article about a man in
Colorado who was busted by the feds for growing medical marijuana
even though he was licensed by the state to do so. Events like this
raise some very important constitutional questions.
First off, whatever happened to the 10th Amendment? You see, the 10th
was supposed to act like a wall of separation between direct federal
rule and the citizens of each of the states. The only power the feds
had when it came to the states was to regulate international trade
and to rule on the constitutionality of state laws. In order for
federal law to supersede state law, there should be a constitutional
amendment repealing the 10th. I don't think the 14th is that
amendment, by the way.
Now when it comes to anti-pot/drug laws, didn't it take a
constitutional amendment to bring about the failed alcohol
prohibition? So where is the amendment giving the feds the power to
regulate pot/drugs? There is none.
Did you know that the original anti-pot/drug legislation came in the
form of taxes like the Harrison Tax Act of 1917 or the Marijuana Tax
Act of 1937? So why do we think this was the case? Could it be that
forbidding the use by law of any intoxicants would have violated the
Constitution? This was of course at a time when the legal boundaries
set by the Constitution were respected. Nowadays politicians spend
their time trying to skirt around it. The perfect example are the
anti-pot/drug laws. This makes laws like these far more dangerous to
the very fabric of our nation than the pot/drug laws they're supposed
to protect us from.
What makes these laws so dangerous is that they set precedents, that
then makes it easier to pass more constitutional skirting laws. This
is the main reason we're all losing so many of our rights and
freedoms. It's laws like these that should no longer be tolerated --
or the politicians that pass them -- or else we're going to see a
dictatorship as a result of inaction on your part.
JOE DePAUL, Casper
Member Comments |
No member comments available...