Topic: Proposed law would criminalize US citizens' planning to legally use drugs overseas
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg started this discussion 15 years ago #12,749
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/us-drug-policy-war-congress_n_998993.html?1318006907
The new law, sponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) allows prosecutors to bring conspiracy charges against anyone who discusses, plans or advises someone else to engage in any activity that violates the [Controlled Substances Act], the massive federal law that prohibits drugs like marijuana and strictly regulates prescription medication.
"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 [...]. "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."
Note that you can only be prosecuted if you do this planning while in the US, not while in another country (I don't think the article makes that very clear). But it's still a scary idea to me."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 [...]. "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."
(Edited 1 minute later.)
!hEyBrieeXM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later[^] [v] #229,314
Department of thought crimes.
We need one now.
We need one now.
TheSheep !kJ.A4PF7.k joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,316
America :'D
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,317
You already let the same thing happen for sex tourism, where people that have sex with kids abroad can be prosecuted in the US. As such it will be pretty hard to justify not passing this law - shot yourselves in the foot there. We all know there is no sense in having drugs illegal, this law will just be another retarded waste of money.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,320
@previous (D)
I had that same point about sex tourism in my op but edited it out. I think there's an important difference between the two laws but need to hunt down the sex tourism one first.
I had that same point about sex tourism in my op but edited it out. I think there's an important difference between the two laws but need to hunt down the sex tourism one first.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,329
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,330
@229,320 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
There's no real difference, you either think it's okay to enforce laws on people regardless of borders or you don't. Morals are subjective, as soon as you allow law makers to factor in their personal beliefs you're in dangerous territory.
There's no real difference, you either think it's okay to enforce laws on people regardless of borders or you don't. Morals are subjective, as soon as you allow law makers to factor in their personal beliefs you're in dangerous territory.
SQUARED :3 !L.....AlN. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 51 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,332
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,336
Fucking fun police. This place gets gayer by the day.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,342
@229,330 (D)
I was referring to whether the law treated conspiracy equivalently to committing the act. I thought the sex tourism one didn't, but that's not the case.
I don't have a problem with the sex tourism law and probably wouldn't have an issue with this one if it just dealt with trafficking. It's the possession/use angle that's "too far" to me.
What laws would we even have if you took out morality entirely?
I was referring to whether the law treated conspiracy equivalently to committing the act. I thought the sex tourism one didn't, but that's not the case.
I don't have a problem with the sex tourism law and probably wouldn't have an issue with this one if it just dealt with trafficking. It's the possession/use angle that's "too far" to me.
What laws would we even have if you took out morality entirely?
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
ValtaK !0VegJ9Jl.Q joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,345
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #229,346
Wow... who the fuck sits around thinking shit like this up?? I'm not surprised its a Republican that came up with this shit, but they are supposed to be all about less government. Those Republicans have really been ruffling my jimmies lately.
ValtaK !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 15 years ago, 28 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #229,357
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
Looks like the pharmaceutical lobbyists are at it again. I wish I had the money to lobby for the criminalization of lobbying.
Looks like the pharmaceutical lobbyists are at it again. I wish I had the money to lobby for the criminalization of lobbying.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #229,358
@229,345 (ValtaK !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
> America is best where the baptists are less.
I cannot argue with you on that one.
> America is best where the baptists are less.
I cannot argue with you on that one.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,466
@229,346 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
Lol, you think republicans want less government? Haha, i used to think the same thing.
No, No, they just want different government. One that deregulates business and focuses instead on regulating narrow moral agendas. Lol, less government... You're such a card, Ks.
Lol, you think republicans want less government? Haha, i used to think the same thing.
No, No, they just want different government. One that deregulates business and focuses instead on regulating narrow moral agendas. Lol, less government... You're such a card, Ks.
ValtaK !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,470
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 30 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,484
They did the same thing for sex with a girl who is 17.9 years old. Nobody complained.It was signed into law back when Clinton was president.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,485
@229,466 (I)
I know all about the Republicans. ;)
My point was, they always say they want less government. I know politicians say a lot of shit, but that is a big selling point for Refucklicans, and they constantly do theexact opposite when they get in office. What can be said? lolpolitics
I know all about the Republicans. ;)
My point was, they always say they want less government. I know politicians say a lot of shit, but that is a big selling point for Refucklicans, and they constantly do the
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 56 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,501
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
Yep, they pay lip service to freedom and less government, but it's just something inspiring to say for most of them. Some of them believe in "less government" as far as capital gains taxes and corporate tax breaks are concerned, but outside of that, it's just a talking point that tests well with the voters.
Not sure if you caught Congressman Paul Broun yesterday calling the Wall Street protests "an attack on freedom" yesterday, but you might get a kick out of it. Or it might make you burst a blood vessel, I don't really know.
Yep, they pay lip service to freedom and less government, but it's just something inspiring to say for most of them. Some of them believe in "less government" as far as capital gains taxes and corporate tax breaks are concerned, but outside of that, it's just a talking point that tests well with the voters.
Not sure if you caught Congressman Paul Broun yesterday calling the Wall Street protests "an attack on freedom" yesterday, but you might get a kick out of it. Or it might make you burst a blood vessel, I don't really know.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,503
Both parties are full of hypocrites and liars. Move on.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,578
@229,485 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> politicians say a lot of shit and they constantly do the exact opposite when they get in office
lolobamaLOL
> politicians say a lot of shit and they constantly do the exact opposite when they get in office
lolobamaLOL
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,595
@229,485 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
You've got to be joking. For an elected politician to say he wants less government is like a 30 year old man telling you he wants less sex. It's a fucking lie to get in your pants.
You've got to be joking. For an elected politician to say he wants less government is like a 30 year old man telling you he wants less sex. It's a fucking lie to get in your pants.