HEMPhasis

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:00:00 GMT

# My latest offering in the High Road thread about Hunter's arrest:

Highland Ranger:
Wow, a BLACK and WHITE guy. How basic. I am certainly no historian, but I know the reason why these documents survive today is the fact that they are living, that means they can be AMENDED. That's not nonsense; it's what our system of Government is based on. For someone who proclaims to be a (rude) activist, seems like this basic fact is missing from your knowledge base. Curious. Makes me think you are just a troll after all.
Yes, the U.S. Constitution and state Constitutions can be amended. In the case of the U.S. Constitution it requires a 2/3 majority in Congress and ratification of 2/3 of the state legislatures. It has happened a number of times. Great! That's not a problem. The problem is that the various governments don't bother to amend their constitutions any more. They just go ahead and make blatantly unconstitutional "laws", and the courts usually uphold them.

"Shall not be infringed" is very strong language with an obvious meaning: no gun laws, period, no restrictions whatsoever on possession or carrying of arms. No amendment has ever weakened that language, and many here, I among them, would argue that the Bill of Rights may not be amended; without it the Constitution would never have been ratified, and it highlights basic human rights that may not be denied.

The 18th amendment was ratified in 1919. It prohibited the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors." It was repealed in 1933 by the 21st amendment. The Constitution still had meaning in those days. The members of Congress realized that they had no constitutional authority to ban alcoholic beverages, so they amended the Constitution. Congress has no Constitutional authority to regulate other drugs, either. But they have banned a whole list of "controlled substances" without bothering this time to amend the Constitition. Congress is expressly forbidden to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. But they have passed bill after bill (I won't call them laws, since, being unconstitutional, they aren't) doing exactly that.

America was created as a constitutional republic. Legislation in the tiny domain in which the Constitution allowed the government to operate, was decided by democratic means, but anything not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution was off limits. No more. We have morphed into a pure representative democracy, guaranteed by the laws of nature to have a short life.

I'll close with a quote I'm sure is familiar to many. This version came from http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/002541.html:
An observation by the Scottish Historian Professor Alexander Tyler, circa 1787, on the decline and fall of the Athenian Republic.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilization has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence. From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into bondage."
I would put the U.S. in the "from apathy to dependence" part of this cycle, rapidly falling into bondage. I hope the courageous amongst us can push us back to liberty quickly, but I doubt I'll live to see it.

[note: I misremembered how the Constitution is amended. Amendments are proposed by 2/3 of both houses of Congress or by a convention initiated by 2/3 of the state legislatures. They are ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures or by conventions in 3/4 of the states. See article 5 of the Constitution]

# HEMPhasis is a new magazine, published by Bob Newland, dedicated to the legalization of industrial hemp. From their opening statement, Crazy? Malicious? Merely stupid? An observation on the present state of affairs. [claire]

We're tired of the stupid political policy argument over whether or not industrial hemp production should be allowed in the United States. We're sick over the damage this argument has caused us as a society and the damage it has caused several personal acquaintances of ours, and the damage it has caused us personally.

Politicians, "law enforcement" zealots, and unprincipled, dishonest business interests have teamed up to create public policy which is insane and immensely counterproductive, then attempt to justify it by bragging about the damage their policies have caused. Having shifted the world's most beneficial agricultural product into the realm of "drugs', they then suggest that their miserably failed drug policy is a thing of beauty, and only lacks our agreement that hemp is "drugs" in order to have achieved complete success in preventing illicit drug use.

Their arguments defy characterization. "Absurd" is simply inadequate.

There are four categories into which those who oppose industrial hemp production fall. They are: uninformed, stupid, crazy, or malicious. There are no other possibilities.

...

Again and again we see how well some subsystems work, even as they work to destroy the greater systems of which they are a part. No plant on earth seems as anxious to please man as does hemp. No plant which even approaches it in versatility of usefulness can grow in as many latitudes and altitudes as hemp. Food, fuel, clothing, shelter, and jobs for as many people as want to specialize in any facet of production; there must be some reason God placed hemp on Earth. We doubt that it was to provide cops, lawyers, judges, prison guards, and urine testing companies reasons for existence.

We'd rather believe--and we think we have justification to so believe--that it was placed on Earth to be the perfect food, soothing and versatile dietetic and industrial oil, strong fiber and cloth, and durable building product it is, all while being the most efficient farm crop at exchanging carbon dioxide for oxygen in the atmosphere. The latter quality may become more important as the last of the rain forests are logged out and burnt off to provide a couple of years cropping before the already-poor soil is depleted entirely and left to erode into the Amazon River.

All our opponents are caught up in some short-sighted system which is working at odds with the system which governs all life. They're as much victims of misguided public policy as we are. We don't assume to understand more than a part of what the "big" system even looks like, but we try to look at the parts we can see with a critical eye. What we see of public policy regarding the hemp plant simply makes no sense, even by the credulity standards of most who oppose hemp production, and it can not stand up to even the most rudimentally informed of arguments.

With that in mind, HEMPhasis will attempt to provide some of the rudiments for some of the arguments to come.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Previous Posts:
Support Hunter's Defense Today
More on Hunter's Case
Hunter Arrested in Ohio
2004
BGBlitz
Still Coughing
Welcome Back, New Jersey Weedman!
Habeus Corpus Survives, So Far
Eragorn
Christmas, 2003

Navigation

History

Quotes

Government doesn't work. Never did. Never will. Can't. But there are lots of good people. Love them.

-- Bill St. Clair

The Atlanta Declaration

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

-- L. Neil Smith

Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings.

-- L. Neil Smith

A Penalty Clause for the Bill of Rights

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

-- L. Neil Smith

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

-- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report on gun control laws.

Who is a libertarian?

Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap")

"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."

-- L. Neil Smith

(Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP")

Why Did It Have to be... Guns?

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

-- L. Neil Smith

Concise

"Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

-- Mike Vanderboegh

Also from The Atlanta Declaration:

... like going to the bathroom, breathing, eating, sleeping, or making love, it turns out that self-defense is a bodily function one cannot safely or effectively delegate to a second party.

-- L. Neil Smith

This does not mean that "Marijuana should be available by prescription." It means that morphine sulfate should be available in five pound bags at the supermarket for a couple of bucks, like sugar... but probably in a different aisle, to avoid confusion.

-- Vin Suprynowicz

If you refuse to pay unjust taxes, your property will be confiscated. If you attempt to defend your property, you will be arrested. If you resist arrest, you will be clubbed. If you defend yourself against clubbing, you will be shot dead. These procedures are known as the Rule of Law.

-- Edward Abbey

The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war.

-- Bill St. Clair