posted May 31, 2000 08:13 PM         

Warning: This press release could be illegal under new anti-drug legislation

WASHINGTON, DC -- Politicians are so desperate to win the War on Drugs that they're willing to outlaw this press release, the Libertarian Party said today.

"Warning: This press release contains illegal information," said the party's National Director Steve Dasbach. "You could be prosecuted -- and sentenced to a 10-year prison term -- for reading it on the air, publishing it in a newspaper, or linking it to your website."

The reason? Congress appears poised to pass legislation that would make it a crime to publicize information about illegal drugs. The bill, HR. 2987, would make it a federal felony to advertise, link a website to, or even publish certain kinds of factual data about drugs, drug culture, or drug paraphernalia.

"The War on Drugs has been turned into a War on Words," said Dasbach. "This bill would make certain kinds of Constitutionally protected speech illegal, and give politicians the power to put Americans in prison for writing, posting, or advocating information the government doesn't like."

The Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act, sponsored by senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) -- passed the Senate unanimously last November. It is now being considered by two House committees.

Supporters say the bill is designed to fight so-called "meth labs," which produce a dangerous form of amphetamine.

But the bill would go far beyond that, said Dasbach -- and would create several new "communication crimes," including:

* Illegal linking (three years in prison): It would be illegal for any "communications facility to post, publicize, transmit, publish, link to, broadcast or otherwise advertise" -- or even provide "indirect advertising for" -- Internet sites that sell drug paraphernalia.

"For example, this press release would be illegal if we mention that www.bongs.com has information about buying marijuana pipes," said Dasbach. "It could even be illegal if we provided this information so you could prevent your children from visiting that site."

* Illegal teaching (10 years in prison). It would be illegal to tell someone how to produce an illegal drug, such as growing marijuana.

"It would be a felony to mention that you can purchase a book about growing marijuana at www.marijuana-hemp.com," said Dasbach. "It could even be a felony if you intended to grow marijuana in a state where medical marijuana is legal, and you planned to grow it for bona fide medical reasons."

The bill is a dangerous expansion of government power, said Dasbach, because although politicians now have the power to outlaw certain activities, the First Amendment prohibits them from outlawing speech about those illegal activities.

"Politicians have already made possession of drugs a crime -- now they want to make possession of press releases, books, newspapers, magazines, and websites about drugs a crime," he said. "If this bill passes, the War on Drugs will have escalated into a full fledged War on the First Amendment."

posted May 31, 2000 09:04 PM            

------------------
Think big. Become BIG.

posted May 31, 2000 09:33 PM         

Source: National Review Online
Published: 5-18-00 Author: Dave Kopel

The Reno Department of Justice is very good at being sneaky. The DOJ's lobbyists are on the verge of successfully sneaking into law a provision which will authorize federal agents to stealthily enter people's homes, search the homes, and not tell anyone.

The Secret Searches measure is so outrageous that it would have no chance of being enacted as a bill on its own, when subjected to public scrutiny and debate. So instead, the DOJ has nestled the Secret Search item deep inside a long bill dealing with methamphetimines. The measure is further disguised with the innocuous title of "Notice Clarification."

Subject to virtually no public discussion, the Secret Searches item has already passed the Senate, hidden inside the methamphetimine giant S. 486. Next week, the House Judiciary Committee will take up H.R. 2987, the House version of the Senate bill, which also contains the buried clause on Secret Searches (section 301). The federal bankruptcy reform bill (which has passed both houses, and is currently in a conference committee) likewise has the hidden Secret Searches language. If the Secret Searches provision became law, it would apply to all searches conducted by the federal government, not just searches involving methamphetimines or bankruptcy.

When conducting searches, federal agents are currently required to announce their presence before entering, and to provide an inventory of any items they take. Because the person whose home or business is being searched knows about the search, he can exercise his Fourth Amendment rights, and make sure that the police have a properly-issued search warrant. He can also see if the search is being conducted according to the warrant's terms � i.e., the police are searching only for items authorized by the warrant, they are searching the right address, etc.

But under a Secret Searches law, federal police could enter a person's home surreptitiously, conduct a search, and not tell the homeowner until months later.

Even months later, the police would not have to provide an inventory of "intangible" items which were taken in a search. So if the police entered your home secretly, and photocopied your diary or made a copy of your computer hard disk, they would never have to inform you of their actions.

Should the Secret Searches item be deleted from the methamphetimine and bankruptc bills, it is likely that Clinton will try to sneak the item into a gigantic budget bill, during the Congressional Republicans' annual fall appropriations surrender. Take note:

posted May 31, 2000 09:34 PM            

This country isn't run by the people, why is it so hard for everyone to understand that.
There is a war fought everyday that has some sort of impact on everyones lives. From the Homeless man living under the bridge, to the infant child playing with his toys.

Doesn't matter how we vote or what we say or want.
THIS is the chain I believe how things work in this country:

Hardwork+Time=Money=Greed+morehardwork=Power=Is what makes men Rulers and everyone else there followers

There are only a select few that attain the ruling status, and when one member of that ruling class crosses the others then god help him

posted May 31, 2000 10:18 PM            

second of all...as for the internet goes, the US Gov't has absolutely no jurisdiction over it..thats the bottom line. They don't have the tools, nor the authority to block access to sites...i laughed when i saw that one..

and last, but certainly not least..this goes for the secret service searches. much like the other bill and the first amendment..this bill would eliminate ALL of our 4th amendment rights that protect us from unreasonable search and seizure. also, to insure that our 4th amendment rights aren't violated, we've got the exclusionary rule on our side...which states that illegally seized evidence can't be used in court.

on a different note...i'm still operating under the assumption that if a stranger enters your house w/out permission..you have every right to kick his shit.

what better time to reiterate the famous saying "knowledge is power"..and to give a shout out to my old gov't teacher!!

posted May 31, 2000 10:44 PM            

In the State of Texas if any police officer enters your home without a warrant you do have the right to shoot them...I didn't believe it till my Criminal Justice Teacher showed me a few of the many clauses in the Texas State Consitution. and later I had it confirmed by a lawyer who was my business law prof. pretty cool actually was a bit surprised that I asked but I told him that he wouldn't be getting any business from me..lol..

as for being able to shoot federal agents entering your house illegally, that is against the law...Oh sure you could shoot them if they don't indentify themselves, but there are federal laws that talk about shooting at them being illegal...wish I would have remembered more exact terms, forgetting important things oh well thats college......I don't recall anything saying you couldn't beat the crap out of any of them, but where 1 is others will soon follow count on that...

posted May 31, 2000 11:01 PM            

interesting statements..although i question the legitimacy on shooting at federal officers simply b/c that would imply that one man's life (in this case the fed. officer) is valued more than another (the cop).

posted June 01, 2000 05:52 AM            

Its happened before in this area recently. Reno tried to pass laws concerning internet child porn. Personally I think it was good, but the Court is strict on their stance of the First Amendment.

There are certain limits to restricting speech:

There are only 5 Categories of unprotected speech that can be outlawed:

1) defamatory statements
2) obscenity
3) Fraudulent Misrepresentation
4) Fghtng words
5) advocatng illegal activity

it is only ths last one where they could outlaw sites that provide info about drugs. But it is unlikely because the "advice" must 1) Be likely to promote IMMINENT lawless bahvior, and 2) that lawless behavior must be likely to actually occur.

Giving advice on how to shoot sus won't do. It must be a source telling you were to get it and how to order and being likely that the person will indeed order. Which smart sites like this don't allow to happen.

The same with the books about growing marijuana. It must be likely that people will actually go out and use the info to grow the mary j. This is difficult to prove so that is why you can get these books.

Another reason this law won't pass. The doctrine of overbreath - a law cannot make activities illegal which would also cover legal activities. This law would, because it would apply to sites that are not advocating IMMINENT LAWLESS BEHAVIOR.

So don't worry bros. Elite is here to stay.

So if you get a shutdown notice George, call SPOON and he will defend the day. The Constitution is our friend. It's the fuckin old bastard law makers that are the evil fucks.

SPOON HAS LEFT THE BUILDING.

posted June 01, 2000 10:50 AM         

Regarding arms to defend your home against federal agents breaking in. In St. Louis Mo a few years back a man heard what he thought were intruders in his house in the middle of the night. They were federal agents who had entered (the wrong house). Imagine a sleepy startled guy in his bathrobe carrying a pistol (if he had taken a CCW course he would be EXTREMELY well trained for a civilian) who has probably never actually even pointed a gun at a human target before....coming face to face with numerous individuals in full body armor (helmets, chest shields etc) in combat formation carrying the latest up to date high power firearms who are wide awake amped briefed and coordinated as a team with hundreds of hours or training , many if not all of whom have already killed humans. When all was said and done the federal agents issued an apology for being in the wrong house and did pay to have the carpet cleaned. There have been other famous cases like this. One involving a man who owned a large piece of property the gov't had been trying to buy to add to the state park reserves. They supposedly filmed from a surveillance plane marijuana growing on his vast acreage of property - now they had probable cause. Same scenario as above. As they broke in late at night and he went to defend himself with the little pistol, it was over before it started. The reason it was so suspicious was as the final result of the operation, the gov't obtained his property as part of legal evidence...... it appeared like this op was all part of simply aquiring the land he stubbornly refused to sell.

Re: taking back the country by force. Even with equal numbers of weapons and forces, the gov't has such high tech intelligence gathering systems that the tactical advantage definately would go to the gov't. Maybe if a milita type of group had numerous satellites that could watch the movements of the gov't forces, wire taps, surveillance cameras, and had infiltrated the higher echelons with moles - then maybe. (Ever see the movie Enemy of the State?) But the fact is a militia (even with a nuclear war head) is only going to blow up alot of innocent people in the process.

I do have a trust that there is an intelligence to how the universe runs. When you see a fruit that releases an intoxicating gas once a year that attracts a specific male species of wasp at just the right time so the gas puts him to sleep just as a female wasp hatches from the fruit and they can mate - I know there is some plan this all operates by. It can't just happen by accident. It is more perfectly orchestrated then the best swiss watches. The Universe has a way of overturning corruption. Rather then guns we need to establish absolute limits to the amount of time anyone can hold a political office. In other words eliminate professional politicians.

First establish finite terms that anyone can serve in any office - maybe 8 years. If they have been a mayor for 4 years and then become president they can serve 4 years and then NEVER EVER serve in any other public politcal arena ever again. What this will do is put many many many of the common people in office. Of course most of them don't know jack shit about politics and that is just the point. But everyone in the country including Moe Dank would have to be willing at one point or another to serve in such a capacity - whether it is county prosecuter or state congressman. Less lip service and more action from people. A 4 week full time training center would have to be created where newly elected individuals would go for 4 weeks, and 18 hours a day get crash courses in the rules of doing their position. For example what "overruled means" if you are a judge. Second, huge financial reins on salaries, slush funds and soft contributions to politicians. If they made perhaps $45,000 a year tops - which is adequate to live on - they would not want to be lifetime politicians.

Lifetime politicans know the ins and outs of the game of politics it is scarey. Of course it would be scarey for many of the common people to take a shot - but the average person is a pretty smart creature. Heck, if the average mother of 5 could take a shot at analyzing the expenditures of the countries budget we would have a surplus of money in a short amount of time. How many single mothers would spend money on the worthless crap politicians spend money on? Pres. Bill spent what was it...like $200,000....of the gov't budget when he shut down the Dallas airport so his airforce one jet could idle on the runway as he got his hair cut? Gore took an airforce one chopper to the golf course once at a cost of just around $50,000.....oooops. Give that budget money to a single mother who only buys canned vegetables on triple coupon day at the grocery store and that junk would go.

People need to get involved and take back the country, but not by guns. Ain't going to work. We need to push for term limits. George Washington was one wise muther fucker when he urged passing a law that limited presidential terms to only two (total of 8 years).He could foresee that a president that could be elected over and over and over again (and potentially rig the ballots) could become a king. I just wish all political offices had term limits and forced average people (barbers, footballers, farmers, mechanics etc) to put their experience and knowledge to work for the country.

Of course this idea is only rough, but I think it is giving the country back to the people truly is the only way.

[This message has been edited by NoviceJuicer (edited June 01, 2000).]