Jimbog - Thanks.
You're right. I'm taking a big responsibility on to counter a tiny problem in my life.
And I'd agree with you - except that the fundamental problem with the drug laws is that they cannot exist constitutionally.
Harm is irrelevant - so long as it's consensual.
Piercings, tattoos...
Harm is done - through consent - and it is not a crime; it's a service.
I fail to see how drugs are any different.
I don't have to argue that drugs don't do harm; I only have to argue that drugs are NOT criminal in and of themselves; the harm that is claimed by the prosecution - against society - is hypothetical, conjectural, and vague.
As such, no party with standing exists, no crime exists, no jurisdiction exists, and no legitimate charges exist.
The whole thing is a non-issue.
Sure - drugs may harm the user. This is a risk they knowingly and willingly take. Consent precludes the possibility of CRIME.
Sure - the user MAY (hypothetically and conjecturally) commit crimes against society.
If that is the case, those crimes must - under the equal protection clause - be punished accordingly.
The drug use itself cannot be criminal so long as it is consensual.
Drugging another against their will - without consent or their knowledge? Rape - in a sense; and again, that's a crime.
No crime exists in this case.
As a free member of a society - based upon individual rights and liberties - I cannot fathom the concept of waiving my liberty to choose what is good and bad for myself.
The other issue is that the very "crime" I'm being tried with is for the claim and exercise of my protected rights of property and contract.
I know I've gotten some flack for the "contract" bit - but without the ability to contract/dispose of one's property as he sees fit, what rights to his property does he really have?
Congress makes all contracts with drugs illegal - then makes it illegal to possess drugs, even if you make them. Better yet, they make it illegal to use your time, energy, and talents (and currently held property) to turn it into a useful product.
That's criminal deprivation of liberty.
The laws themselves must be challenged if I'm going to get off completely.
You're absolutely right - this is MY LIFE.
Everyone tells me that I don't realize how serious this is. My comment is that they don't understand how serious the whole situation is.
The charges are not serious. If they were serious, there would be a victim.
However the entirity of the situation IS serious.
It's my life - but it's also your life.
And my sister's life. My parent's life. My neighbor's life.
And if the government is going to commit the same crimes against my family, friends, and countrymen - then I cannot sit idly by while they trounce around slaughtering the very liberties they are sworn to protect.
I've said this before, and I repeat myself;
If I am enslaved to a master I do not recognize and do not grant unconditional command of my life, then it matters not if I have walls of a prison to encase my physical body, as the bars upon the windows of my soul have already drained the very life from me.
So - if any of my arguments sounds unreasonable, please let me know so that I can abandon them and take up new ones, or reinforce them so that they become the bulwark necessary to withstand the siege that's upon me.
Granted - the whole thing sounds unreasonable;
"The drug laws are wrong. Stop tying to charge me with them!"
But it's right.
Constitutionally, collectivism is prohibited.
Constitutionally, property rights are inherent in the individual - and cannot be usurped by the state except by due process of law (guilty verdict by a jury, or constitutional amendment).
Neither has taken place.
No crime is alleged.
Disobedience of a master I do not recognize is a "crime"?
Congress has a RIGHT to dictate what is and is not acceptable conduct - and by disobeying I am infringing upon that RIGHT?
If not, the court has no jurisdiction as there is no party with standing to bring charges.
It's all completely insane...
And I'm not sure if I've lost my mind - or if things are really this easy...
Or everything is misconstrued and contorted, so that we no longer have rights and the entire concept of a Constitutional government is an utter sham. In which case, the government, judge, Congress... all of them are acting completely without legal authority, and every act of power they commit is an outright crime against the American People.
I don't know any more.
But there's a fire burning inside me that isn't willing to let a few criminals attempting to run my life instill fear in me and force me to obey their will unquestioningly.
And that's exactly what they are; criminals.
The prosecutor - who makes a living by arguing and pushing for another person to be deprived of their rights... Who's entire existence is devoted to the destruction of other's liberty and livelihood...
That's a sociopath for you.
The judge, I hope, remains neutral.
We'll see.
As far as my audience goes - the judge will rule on the motion.
The judge teaches a course on the International drug trade and how it effects our civil liberties at the University of California, Irvine.
He's a Vietnam veteran.
He fought communism.
The drug laws are based on the communist concept of state proprietorship - individual privileged possession/usage.
The Constitution has been abandoned in an attempt to seize absolute power over the American people.
Lies, falsehoods, and terrorist threats have been used in order to influence the American people to oppose the peace movement (Original reason for outlawing drugs - attempt to dismantle anti-war speech), and wage war upon each other, rather than stand united against those that would oppress them.
And I have no qualms about raising these issues in court.
I can't make a poll (unless I get permission to make a new thread
) - but I like the idea.
My biggest problem is that things are clear in my head...
I can explain them simply (er... it seems to be a simple explanation to me. Let me know what doesn't make sense >_<)
And back them with both the Constitution and case law.
The prosecutor is opposing me with minor technicalities that ignore the greater issues.
The courts ALWAYS do this in their rulings.
It's a known flaw with the system - rather than rule on the BIG issue, the smaller issue (failure of due process, failure to read Miranda rights, etc.) is taken and the case is dismissed.
Overturning laws is no longer a function of the court.
See here;
http://new.revolutioni.st
Sure - a lot of that is personal belief, but for the love of all that's holy, if we don't start standing up for our RIGHTS and our LIBERTY, we'll never get it back.
I may have lost my mind, but I honestly do not believe I'm free outside of prison.
What difference will it make if I'm offered free room, board, and clothing or if I remain "free" in order to fend for myself and attempt to feed, house, and clothe myself while my rights remain checked by laws which prohibit their free exercise?
If I can walk into court and not fear the outcome - and not really care one way or another which way things go, I have nothing to lose.
And only by having nothing to lose can someone be willing to risk it in an attempt to gain everything.
For me, I'll lose the facade of freedom.
If my freedom is nothing more than a facade, why should I not risk it in an attempt to claim true freedom?
Feel free to respond to that in any way you can.
Let me know if I'm losing it, or if my positions are becoming more and more clear.
The brief run through of my arguments;
I have unalienable rights of property and contract.
I do not have constitutional rights, nor rights granted by the constitution.
Congress cannot create rights, as rights are pre-existent to the creation of Congress.
Congress cannot criminalize the claim nor exercise of a constitutionally protected right.
The government’s powers are derived from my rights and consent.
No powers of government may supersede the rights of myself, nor another person, as those powers are not vested in the person attempting to grant those powers to the government.
No party with standing has made a claim against myself or my actions.
There is no “crime” with which I am being charged, no allegations for which I must defend myself;
A legislated presumption is not a criminal offense.
Congress has no power to create rights, as rights are pre-existent to the formation of government. As congress cannot create rights, to include “rights of society,”, statutory standing is a myth created by the prosecution in an attempt to legitimize their criminal actions against myself, and others.
The case law backing that up is in my response;
http://mike.revolutioni.st/9007SR.htm
Are there any points that aren't clear?
Any leaps in logic that need to be brought closer together - smaller steps taken between the stones?
Are there any fallible arguments that I need to address before presenting this to the court?
Those are the only 3 questions on my mind right now.
Stopping and thinking about what's best for "ME" isn't on my mind.
Restoring liberty to my friends, family, and country are what is best for me.
If I must suffer at the hands of criminals for attempting to correct the wrongs being committed against us, then so be it.
This isn't a war against the drug laws. This is a war for our rights and fundamental liberties.
I'll fight it until my last breath is drawn or until our freedoms are restored.
!
