Tag Archives: freedom

Police Survey About Gun Control

Posted on by

A few days ago my wife and I were traveling to a graduation and winging ceremony for our youngest son. We were listening to Glenn Beck on talk radio and his show was centered around a survey from PoliceOne.com of 15,595 police officers from around the country about the proposals for gun control restrictions. The questions ranged from the size of the police force and rank of the officer, to questions about magazine capacity and restrictions on (so-called) assault weapons. The results of the survey indicate that the officers that responded overwhelmingly oppose gun restrictions on magazine capacity and type of gun restrictions and support (91% approval) concealed carry among law-abiding citizens. The survey showed that 80% of the officers surveyed believe armed citizens would have decreased the casualties in tragedies like Aurora and Newtown, and 76% support school personnel being armed as a deterrent to such tragedies.

Our second amendment right is as much about protecting each other, as it is about self-protection and it is the only right that protects us from tyranny by our own government. Many good men and women have given their all in defense of our nation and freedoms and many more have risked life and limb for the same. I for one, just can’t give up that right for the fallacy of safety. If you can’t protect yourself or those around you, you are vulnerable to any who would do harm, be it armed assault, rape or robbery.

Glenn Beck article from TheBlaze.com http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/10/survey-law-enforcement-personnel-overwhelmingly-oppose-obamas-gun-control-proposals/

PoliceOne.com survey  http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

Randy Johnson

If You Don’t Want The Right To Bear Arms Then Change The Constitution

Posted on by

My right to bear arms in defense of me and mine are rights that had been honored in free societies for hundreds if not thousands of years before the Constitution of the United States was written. The founders of our nation and signers of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution believed so much in our right to bear arms that they enshrined that right in the Bill of Rights. My right to bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of the United States. It is my second amendment right and states should not be able to deny that right, just like they can’t take away my right to freedom of religion or my right to speak out against tyranny. These rights spelled out in the Constitution were put there to protect our freedom and the right to bear arms is crucial to that end. The type of weapon that can be owned or used should not matter because the right to bear arms, among other things, is also to stop tyranny from our own government. To surrender our guns to any government would be Un-American. Congress, Presidents past and present and the Supreme Court have failed to protect that right from state and local governments and that right has been under federal attack as well. As citizens we have failed to oversee those that we elected to lead us. Without our voice, our elected officials assume we approve of what they have allowed to happen to our second amendment right. We must speak out against this tyranny now or that right will continue to be infringed.

For those of you who hate guns and want to get rid of them consider this. There are an estimated 300,000,000 guns in this country and without the government going door to door, searching houses and killing all who oppose them, these guns are not going to go away. Most of these guns at the present are in the hands of good people who believe in the rule of law and would stand in your defense if need be. But when you make criminals out of us for exercising our rights and demand that we be defenseless, that changes the whole game. Now you are going against the Constitution that many Americans have sworn to protect against all enemies foreign and domestic. For our elected officials to refuse to support that right is a direct violation of their oath of office. As long as the Constitution says that we have the right to bear arms, that right should be honored anywhere in the United States or its territories. If society can’t accept our right to bear arms, there is a set procedure to change the Constitution spelled out in Article 5 of the Constitution. But if our own government refuses to follow the Constitution, we are no longer a nation ruled by law, but subjects, ruled by decree from the elite who believe they are above the law. Either change the Constitution or honor our rights.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters.html

Federal employee oath of office.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Article. V. of the United States Constitution

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Amendment II of the United States Constitution

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Randy Johnson

LEAP Testifies For Marijuana Legalization In New Hampshire

Posted on by

Cheshire County Prison Superintendent Richard Van Wickler’s testimony about marijuana legalization is very refreshing. Richard Van Wickler is a member of LEAP “Law Enforcement Against Prohibition” and was representing LEAP at this meeting to discuss HB492, a bill calling for legalization of marijuana in New Hampshire. Van Winkler presented a very straight forward testimony, presented good evidence to support his views and rebutted some of the incorrect propaganda presented as facts by the anti-marijuana groups, such as the gateway theory and the fact that there is simply no study ever conducted that agrees with the gateway theory. He also explains how legalization is a much better approach to the marijuana issue because decriminalization leaves the criminal supply chain in place and does not address the violence associated with an unregulated market. Legalization puts drug dealers out of business and makes it more difficult for minors to obtain marijuana similar to the carding of people buying alcohol or tobacco. LEAP presents a very logical, compassionate and just plan for legalization of marijuana that discourages all drug use, while protecting our freedom and reducing crime and violence in America. An added benefit would be the restoration of the close relationship we should all have with law enforcement, when it is no longer us against them. I applaud the members of LEAP that have chosen to stand for a common sense drug policy in this country.

Van Winkler’s testimony can be seen here, about 17 minutes.  http://www.leap.cc/richard-van-wickler-testifies-for-marijuana-legalization/

http://www.leap.cc/

Thanks

Randy Johnson

Our Government Is Out Of Control

Posted on by

We have so many laws on the books that anyone, anywhere could be charged with a crime of some sort. Last year the federal government added tens of thousands more pages to the mountain of federal laws already on the books. Local laws on top of those make it impossible to be legal at all times, even if you work hard at it. In the past year or so I have read about armed milk raids, kids busted for lemonade stands or selling cookies, a man jailed for trapping rainwater on his own property, people fined for having the wrong kind of tree, people fined for home gardening, people fined for cleaning a drainage ditch and the list goes on and on. There seems to be no end to the madness of telling people how to live their lives and what they may do with their own property. I really am having trouble understanding why Americans are not more concerned about what is happening to our freedom. Maybe its like boiling a frog. The supposition is that if you put the frog in cool water and warm it slowly it won’t try to get out. While I have never attempted to boil a frog and there is likely a law against that, the analogy seems to fit. The incremental loss of freedom seems to keep us apathetic to change. Surely if we lost our freedom all at once, people would complain. We seem to be so disconnected as a people that we don’t care when others are harmed by the system designed to govern our society. We seem numb to the injustice and we don’t take the steps required to keep our government in check. Our leaders view silence, as approval of what they are doing. We must communicate what we expect from them if we want them to govern in a certain direction, and here lately we have just have just been along for the ride. If we don’t tell them we want our freedom preserved, the day may not be far away when we will miss the freedom we lost. Considering what our freedom cost, it would be a terrible thing, to just let it slip away.

This YouTube video by John Stossel, “Illegal Everything” seems to tell it all. Sorry for the length of a little over 40 minutes but it is worth seeing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBiJB8YuDBQ

Please call or write to your elected officials and let them know how important you believe your freedom should be to them.

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

Is Freedom Like Love

Posted on by

I was listening to talk radio a few weeks or so ago and the guest speaker was talking about the sad shape our country is in and the need for a unified effort for positive change. One thing that he said got me to thinking. He said hate is not the opposite of love. The opposite of love is indifference. When we are indifferent to those around us there is no love. It doesn’t matter what is involved. It could be homelessness, hunger, mental illness, drug addiction or grief. Indifference to the strife of others is not love in any form. It is the opposite of love. Not born of hate, but of apathy. When we love others we try to help them, even if we get nothing in return and that makes life better for all of us. Love makes life worth living and forms bonds between us. Funny thing about love is that it only works when it is given away. When love is withheld, apathy is born which leaves fertile ground for hatred and bitterness. Freedom, like love only works when we give it willingly to others even when they do things we may not like or agree with. If we only allow freedom to those who do things we approve of, bans on unwanted activity spring forth, and freedom dies incrementally. No matter what we chose to do, some will find it favorable and some will object. There are no universally accepted behaviors. Consider worshipping God. If you worship the right God you may find favor with those that agree you have chosen correctly but others will vehemently disagree. Wars throughout history have been fought over just such disagreements.

If we want freedom to survive, we must look out for each other and be willing to stand together in support of each other because apathy kills freedom. Freedom is an expression of love for your fellow-man. Freedom is one of the principles that our country was built on. Many Americans have given their all in defense of that freedom and many more have risked the same. We should not let their blood and sacrifice be in vain. We should stand together in support of our freedom.

Randy Johnson

President Obama and Congress Should Stop This War

Posted on by

The war against marijuana should end immediately and here is why. The laws against marijuana use were first proposed under the guise of racial intolerance and trumped-up fear of an imaginary plague of harm to society. Horror stories were given prominence in Randolph Hearst’s national array of newspapers, largely because of his hatred of Mexicans and to protect his vast holdings of timber land for pulp and paper production from competition with hemp. The Dupont empire was also in favor of marijuana prohibition because it was competition for their newly developed synthetic fiber, Nylon. Nylon could be used as fiber in the production of explosives which was the mainstay of Dupont at that time. The cellulose fiber in explosives had previously been hemp. Also in favor of prohibition was Rockefeller and Standard Oil, because it was a competition for the new oil and gas industry as hemp oil could be replaced in most applications with petroleum products. The cotton industry also profited by the elimination of hemp as a source for fiber to make clothing. http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/chapter-four/

Newly appointed head of the Bureau of Narcotics, Harry J. Anslinger would testify before Congress of the horrors happening across the country associated with marijuana use. He would read the stories from Hearst’s newspapers aloud before Congress as testimony of the need for federal intervention. Largely unknown or ignored was the fact that cannabis patent medicines and elixirs had been a large part of the pharmacopeia in America for almost 100 years without any health problems arising from its use. If any problems were associated with cannabis they were not mentioned in the medical journals of the time. Hemp had been a mainstay for agriculture and society for thousands of years with a myriad of different uses from food and shelter to clothing. Remnants of the propaganda of that era, such as the classic film Reefer Madness can be seen at web sites like.

http://archive.org/details/reefer_madness1938

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reefer_madness

http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults4.htm

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/studies.htm

http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/

Fear gained traction as an unwitting public who were unfamiliar with the name marijuana were being told horrendous stories of crime and violence against white people by marijuana crazed minorities. It was an easy sell to America, which was still deeply mired in racial intolerance at the time and women had just acquired the right to vote barely two decades before. As America became entrenched in this fear of the marijuana plague, the propaganda campaign continued and even today our government refuses to acknowledge any benefits associated with marijuana use, only acknowledging the studies and anecdotal evidence that support the belief that marijuana is harmful to individuals and society. While I don’t believe that marijuana is harmless, it is certainly not as harmful as the two legal recreational drugs alcohol and tobacco. The harm to society and to individuals from marijuana use has been grossly overstated by our government which has poured over a trillion dollars into this failed and unjust war against Americans to protect big business from loss or competition with marijuana and hemp. This racially biased, unjust war against us continues today and it should end immediately. It is still supported by the same industries and now others such as the prison industry, the drug testing industry, the alcohol industry and the vast array of drug treatment centers across the country that are asking Congress to crack down on Colorado and Washington for allowing legal marijuana within their own state. And let’s not forget the DEA, with its multi-billion dollar annual budget and all the power and influence that money can buy. It is hard to surrender that much power and influence to a kinder and gentler society, after all the drug war is a very large employer. Laws that were voted in by free people are still forbidden and enforced by federal mandate.
That gets me to the next issue.

I mentioned in a previous article that all members of Congress take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Well they have failed miserably at that task. The Constitution lays the foundation for a nation of states to govern themselves under a guiding law that preserves basic freedoms and human rights. Our Declaration of Independence describes rights granted by God that are unalienable by man and the Constitution goes further to list some of our rights in the Bill of Rights. The Federal Governments job or function was to provide for common defense and regulate interstate commerce to prevent states from unfair advantage over other states. Its other function is to protect our rights as defined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic which is where they have failed. As far as marijuana prohibition is concerned, The right to self medicate and the right to celebrate life had been a legal right for thousands of years before marijuana and alcohol prohibition. While the unjust war against alcohol was wisely abandoned, the war against marijuana users and their supply continues under the guise of public safety. We have been persecuted with denied employment and government assistance for housing and education, denied the right to adopt children. We have also been prosecuted and punished by Congress with laws mandating drug testing by employers, incarceration and fines and we were stripped of our 2nd ammendment right to keep and bear arms without trial or justification. Our 4th ammendment rights against illegal searches as described in the Constitution, about a search warrant being issued by a judge of law have been circumvented to allow game wardens, housing inspectors and child welfare officers the authority to search without warrants and now the Supreme Court has given that authority to dogs. Am I the only American that finds that troubling?

What our 5th and 6th ammendment rights, the right to appear in a court of law and face our accusers and the right to a speedy trial with a jury of our peers. Our President now believes he has the authority to use drones to kill Americans without trial and to detain Americans indefinitely without trial.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/31/obama-defense-bill_n_1177836.html

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/20/looks-like-shifting-the-cias-drone-progr

How about our right to keep and bear arms. That is our 2nd amendment right and yet the Federal Government has and allowed states to make a mockery of that right. Our right to keep and bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of these United States just like our right to worship and our freedom of speech. Congress, The President and The Supreme Court should insist on the same. Another basic right that our government has failed to protect is our 5th ammendment right to own property. Never should the government be able to take property from an individual and sell it to another individual for profit in the name of eminent domain. Only real public needs such as right of ways or military needs should be secured by eminent domain laws. Taxes beyond the sale of property are a direct assault on that right as the Government believes they own the land and everything on it. Having to pay a periodical tax to continue to own property gives credence to the thought that all property belongs to the government.

http://www.citypaper.net/blogs/nakedcity/Property-owners-protest-eminent-domain-in-Kensington-.html

https://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/supreme-court/supreme-court-series-i-eminent

What about our 4th ammendment rights of privacy, where government surveillance of our e-mail and cell phones has become common? We are on the verge of surveillance capabilities that most Americans never even dreamed of and our freedom is in serious jeopardy. Our freedom should not now or ever have been for sale to protect the profits of the rich. Marijuana prohibition is on the front lines of this war against freedom waged on Americans by our own governmnet. Lets get back to the task of preserving freedom and the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_the_United_States

http://www.marijuanahistory.org/history-of-marijuana-prohibition-in-united-states

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm

http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/

http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-bloom/legalization-or-bust-a-br_b_775684.html

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/05/totally-disinterested-drug-warriors-dema

http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/08/a-group-of-drug-war-profiteers-are-askin

Randy Johnson

I Don’t Believe That Dogs Should Be Used To Authorize Searches

Posted on by

Not long ago, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously that signals from a dog constitutes reasonable search. Traditionally that task has been the sole responsibility of judges of law by issuing a warrant. Our Constitution says that searches are only to be conducted upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and defining the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-drug-sniffing-dog/2013/02/19/1d9f7414-7aac-11e2-82e8-61a46c2cde3d_story.html

Dogs have an amazing ability to smell things that people cannot. They can detect odors hundreds of times better than us and use that keen sense to track animals or humans, detect contraband material, and have even been known to detect cancer with surprising accuracy. But they are not human and do not have the capacity for judgement that is required, not only by our Constitution but also demanded by their task. Peoples lives hang in the balance of the decision of a dog that is mostly focused on pleasing his master. They can’t swear an oath or testify to details about what they are thinking or smelling. Molecular scanners on the other hand, exceed the potential for detection than that of dogs. They are capable of detecting similar things as good as a dog but from 50 meters away and give a printable detail of what they detected. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html  http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/07/11/new-homeland-security-laser-scanner-reads-people-at-molecular-level/

That brings us to the real moral dilemma. This type of technology will not go away. It will only get better and more portable. We may be able to slow the acceptance of this technology and surveillance, but we can’t uninvent it. Eventually it will be accepted as reasonable search without warrant and as evidence in court and will be as acceptable as fingerprints and DNA evidence. Its like the invention of gunpowder or nuclear weapons. You just can’t put the genie back in the bottle. These detectors can already tell what you ate for breakfast, whether your are armed or carrying drugs. The direction our government seems to be heading is for more surveillance and more control of our lives. If we are going to live with this close of surveillance and loss of privacy, do we really want a government that is so intrusive into how we live our lives? I would be a lot less concerned about this loss of privacy and protections from illegal searches if our government was actively trying to protect our rights, but they are not. Already our federal government has put all school children on a diet. It went so far that parents are being told what must be mandatory items in box lunches brought from home. Local governments have been banning all sorts of things from large sugary drinks and cloths lines and even home gardens. America is on the verge of financial collapse with millions of people out of work and they don’t even want us to be able to dry our cloths outdoors or plant a garden. If we don’t demand that our rights are honored, we may be in for some very dark times in the near future. We need to demand that our government protect our rights instead of taking them away

http://cnsnews.com/blog/david-james/levin-michelle-obama-new-eva-peron-her-lunch-standards-she-knows-much-i-do

.http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-11/news/ct-met-school-lunch-restrictions-041120110410_1_lunch-food-provider-public-school

http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2009/03/feds-to-ban-backyard-gardens.html

http://www.care2.com/causes/join-the-fight-to-legalize-clotheslines.html

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/12-things-that-just-happened-that-show-the-next-wave-of-the-economic-collapse-is-almost-here

Marijuana prohibition is on the front lines of this assault on personal freedom. Is marijuana use so unacceptable that we as a society must use the power of the judicial system to either make users stop or remove them from society? Keep in mind this is not some form of tough love. Prohibition is a horrible and hateful thing to do to your fellow citizens. There is no kindness in using the judicial system to try to control unwanted behavior. It is designed solely to ruin people’s lives and cause suffering; physically, mentally and financially. If any of us resist this punishment, that resistance is met with force up to and including deadly force. And then there is the persecution associated with prohibition, being denied employment, legally separated and shunned by society and hated because of lies and misinformation sold to an unwitting public by our own government. Lives are destroyed for preferring a recreational drug that is safer than alcohol. There is no moral difference between alcohol use and that of marijuana, but we are demonized because of the propaganda campaign waged by our own government. There are dozens of common items we use or are exposed to every day that are more harmful or dangerous than marijuana use. Tobacco and alcohol are two good examples, but many over the counter medications such as Tylenol and aspirin kill more people than marijuana. So does salt and trans fats. Obesity kills more people than marijuana. More people die drinking water than from marijuana use and yet we demonize and punish this portion of society. A recent study citing government funded sources, determined that states that had legalized medical marijuana had a 9% reduction in traffic fatalities, but you won’t hear that from the federal government. Their agenda seems to be that of protecting favored businesses from competition or loss from legal hemp and marijuana, even if they have to stifle research and hide the truth. If you are an investor in these industries that profit from the war against marijuana, you may count this as a benefit of prohibition, but from a freedom stand point, we all loose.

http://www.cannabismd.net/mortality/

http://ftp.iza.org/dp6112.pdf

Randy Johnson

Will Government Surveillance Destroy Freedom?

Posted on by

How far will our government go in its effort to control us and keep themselves safe from any threat, or could it be that they really do have our best interest at heart? An article in Wired Magazine written by James Bamford about the new Utah Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah highlights the ever-expanding and scary secret spying on Americans by our government. The art of intelligence gathering has been expanding at unimaginable rates. Methods of gathering information on us from monitoring our location by cell phone GPS signals, to actual monitoring our phone calls, text messaging and e-mail have been improving at great speed under the guise of national security and remain shrouded in secrecy. Huge data bases have been built with more under construction to collect, categorize, analyze and investigate data collected on all of us looking for any perceived threat to national security from drug use to terrorism. Huge computers with amazing speed and capacity pour over data night and day recording and analyzing data from all our phone and computer communications, both personal and business. Data about our web surfing, shopping, internet searches and communications are stored and categorized while being scanned for target words and phrases or connections to known threats. Virtually everything we do is recorded on some computer somewhere and the NSA wants access to that information to examine, looking for any activity it may suspect as criminal or suspicious. Breaking the encryption of all this data takes extremely fast and large computers and they are being built. Former NSA senior crypto-mathematician, William Binney quit the NSA in 2001 citing violations of the U.S. Constitution is his resignation.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/

Binney left the NSA in late 2001, shortly after the agency launched its
warrantless-wiretapping program. “They violated the Constitution setting it up,”
he says bluntly. “But they didn’t care. They were going to do it anyway, and
they were going to crucify anyone who stood in the way. When they started
violating the Constitution, I couldn’t stay.” Binney says Stellar Wind was far
larger than has been publicly disclosed and included not just eavesdropping on
domestic phone calls but the inspection of domestic email. At the outset the
program recorded 320 million calls a day, he says, which represented about 73 to
80 percent of the total volume of the agency’s worldwide intercepts. The haul
only grew from there. According to Binney—who has maintained close contact with
agency employees until a few years ago—the taps in the secret rooms dotting the
country are actually powered by highly sophisticated software programs that
conduct “deep packet inspection,” examining Internet traffic as it passes
through the 10-gigabit-per-second cables at the speed of light.

The software, created by a company called Narus that’s now part of Boeing, is controlled remotely from NSA headquarters at Fort Meade in Maryland and searches US sources for target addresses, locations, countries, and phone numbers, as well as watch-listed names, keywords, and phrases in email. Any communication that arouses suspicion, especially those to or from the million or so people on agency watch lists, are automatically copied or recorded and then transmitted to the NSA.

The scope of surveillance expands from there, Binney says. Once a name is entered into the Narus database, all phone calls and other communications to and from that person are automatically routed to the NSA’s recorders. “Anybody you want, route to a recorder,” Binney says. “If your number’s in there? Routed and gets recorded.” He adds, “The Narus device allows you to take it all.” And when Bluffdale is completed, whatever is collected will be routed there for storage and analysis.

According to Binney, one of the deepest secrets of the Stellar Wind program—again, never confirmed until now—was that the NSA gained warrantless access to AT&T’s vast trove of domestic and international billing records, detailed information about who called whom in the US and around the world. As of 2007, AT&T had more than 2.8 trillion records housed in a database at its Florham Park, New Jersey, complex.

Verizon was also part of the program, Binney says, and that greatly expanded the volume of calls subject to the agency’s domestic eavesdropping. “That multiplies the call rate by at least a factor of five,” he says. “So you’re over a billion and a half calls a day.” (Spokespeople for Verizon and AT&T said their companies would not comment on matters of national security.)

Considering what the government may do with this ever-expanding sea of information Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier published an article in Popsci titled, “Should We Use Big Data To Punish Crimes Before They Are Committed”. Similar to the movie Minority Report, law enforcement may soon have access to unlimited data on all of us fed into huge computers capable of (with surprising accuracy) predicting our behavior. These systems of logarithms that define human behavior and analyze our actions have been shown to predict human aggression with 70% accuracy and it will only get better as advances in these programs are made. As long as this information is not used to punish people for anticipated actions it may not be a problem, but who knows how this loss of privacy will affect our future. Almost as scary is the danger of being categorized and labeled by this information. It could be used to deny employment, insurance and even medical care or gun ownership. How safe will we be when our secrets can be mined and sold. This type of surveillance of our shopping habits and e-mail is already being used to target us with sales and investment offers.

Soon none of us will have any secrets. Drones will soar above us watching our every move and record our communications. Check points with molecular scanners and facial recognition will check if we are armed or carrying drugs and look for people suspected of being criminals. Huge databases with our lives laid bare will be used to target us in ways we never dreamed possible. This information could be used to target gun owners for confiscation or virtually any group or person deemed worthy of government scrutiny. We are all vulnerable to this invasion of privacy and our freedom has already been infringed. Our Constitutional rights are incrementally being neutered and the saddest part is most of us are unaware or unengaged. Apathy may bring the end of freedom as we know it.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/hidden-government-scanners-will-instantly-know-everything-about-you-from-164-feet-away.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-surveillance-system-tracks-every-moving-object-in-an-entire-city.html

This article at Prison Planet.com highlights the recent onslaught of violations of our constitutional rights and the use of ever-increasing surveillance on all aspects of our lives. It discusses the use of drones, information surveillance of our computer and phone usage and smart street lights that can listen to our conversations, track individuals with facial recognition software and cameras and even be used to give instructions through built-in microphones. Who will be the first criminal to surrender to a street light?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/scorecard-how-many-rights-have-americans-really-lost.html

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-03/should-we-use-big-data-to-punish-crimes-before-theyre-committed?cmpid=enews030713&spPodID=020&spMailingID=5245244&spUserID=MzMwOTM5Mjc4NzgS1&spJobID=313385303&spReportId=MzEzMzg1MzAzS0

A research project under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security called FAST (Future Attribute Screening Technology) tries to identify potential terrorists by monitoring individuals’ vital signs, body language, and other physiological patterns. The idea is that surveilling people’s behavior may detect their intent to do harm. in tests, the system was 70 percent accurate, according to the DHS. (What this means is unclear; were research subjects instructed to pretend to be terrorists to see if their “malintent” was spotted?) Though these systems seem embryonic, the point is that law enforcement takes them very seriously.

I know this age of information keeps us busy. We are bombarded with texts and e-mail. We have almost limitless entertainment and information at our finger tips. Never in the history of man has so much information been so portable and accessible or so overwhelming. And never have we been so disconnected from the process of governance. It may be caused by apathy or information overload but we have failed to oversee those that govern us and hold them accountable to constitutional limits. The part that worries me, is that many of our elected officials don’t seem to recognize our rights anymore and they may use this wealth of information to take away more of our rights. We need to demand that they recognize and honor our rights if we want to keep them. The longer we wait, the less likely we will succeed in preserving our freedom.

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

How Will Washington D.C. Respond To Legal Marijuana

Posted on by

In an interview with publication Maclean’s of Canada, Gil Kerlikowske, The U.S. drug czar may have shed a little light on future federal policy concerning Colorado and Washington’s voters decision to legalize marijuana. Gil Kerlikowske said “You’ll continue to see enforcement against distributors and large-scale growers as the Justice Department has outlined. They will use their limited resources on those groups and not on going after individual users.” He went on to say that he did not see marijuana as a human or civil right issue, but as a public health issue. As the interview moved into prescription drug abuse and the influx of Canadian pharmaceuticals where he suggested tamper resistant medications that would not crush or gel when mixed with water. He also touted that our drug interdiction officers work closely with lawmakers to increase manpower in troubled areas. He is also in favor of mandatory drug rehab saying that people who go to rehab voluntarily or under court order have virtually the same success rate. Then he made what I believe is a stupid statement. Speaking about prescription drug abuse he said, “It continued to grow up until this last year at astronomical levels. More people dying of prescription drug abuse than heroin and cocaine combined. After marijuana, we see prescription drugs as the next most significant drug problem we have. It has covered every demographic, age, race, ethnicity, gender. And it’s a bit disproportionate in poor and rural areas.” If more people are dying from prescription drug abuse than heroin and meth combined, how is marijuana the most significant drug problem we have when virtually no one dies from marijuana use and the public health issue is grossly overstated. Where is the damage to society that justifies this heavy hand from the Justice Department against marijuana. I believe the message here is that we can expect more of the same from federal authorities. They will continue to ignore the will of the people, raid and prosecute growers and distributors and anyone who gains enough notoriety to deserve their attention. Also I would expect the harassment of property owners and property confiscations to continue, but it is unlikely that they would ever have the manpower to go after individual users of recreational or medical marijuana. Eric Holder is promising an official response soon. He might say something different but I don’t have a lot of hope. These changes need to come from Congress.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/11/on-the-perils-of-pot-legalization-and-how-canada-creates-drug-problems-for-the-u-s/

http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/11/obamas-own-drug-czar-is-now-publicly-cri

http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/26/eric-holder-says-doj-will-respond-to-leg

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

3D Printing Of Guns Is Improving

Posted on by

In an update to an article published January 18th, titled “3D Printing May Be The Key To Our Freedom” about a printed lower receiver for an AR15, Defense Distributed has improved on the initial model that failed after six shots. The improved version has fired over 600 shots without failure. Also available is a CAD file to print a 30 round magazine for AR15 style rifles. Keep in mind there are many parts for an AR15 that currently would not be feasible to print out of plastic such as the springs, barrel, upper receiver, bolt and firing pin, but these parts are not currently regulated and can be purchased through the mail without an FFL dealer. The ability to make your own gun has been within the realm of anyone who has access to a lathe and milling machine for as long as I can remember and it is perfectly legal to make a gun as long as you don’t make a gun that is currently prohibited, such as a machine gun or a short barrel shotgun. Rep. Steve Israel of New York, is currently trying to ban 3D printing of guns in anticipation of untraceable weapons that do not show up on metal scanners. Similar to the idea of eliminating nuclear weapons, stopping this technology is like trying to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle. Guns simply cannot be un-invented and any attempt to confiscate or eliminate gun ownership is destined to fail. Even if the current 3D gun files available for download could be tracked down and erased, it would not be long before someone else came up with another version. Our government’s attempt to control every aspect of our lives is starting to meet resistance in ways they never imagined. States legalizing marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes and 3D printable guns are just the beginning. However, I am concerned about The Department of Homeland Security’s recent acquisition of 2 billion rounds of ammunition. What horrible plans do they have in store for us next? Are our elected officials so worried about maintaining control that they would use deadly force against us to stay in power? Is it too late to vote them out? I sure hope not.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/27/gun-control-laws-increasingly-irrelevant
http://defcad.org/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/govt-preparing-for-soviet-style-purge-of-americans.html
Randy Johnson

This Declaration Of Rights By Dan Richeson Would Be Great To Print Sign and Mail To Congress And President Obama

Posted on by

Submitted on 2013/02/26 at 4:54 PM

Declaration of Rights of Cannabis Users

Mission Statement: To bring an end to cannabis prohibition in 2013 by gathering signatory members through promotion and declaring our rights through the document, “Declaration of Rights of Cannabis Users”. Giving prohibitionists reasonable opportunity to affect appropriate, timely and agreed upon change and, if necessary enforcing our rights in a peaceful way. After April 20 2013 adopting a zero tolerance for acts of brutality and injustice by prohibitionists.

The laws regarding cannabis were born on the wings of lies and pampered by propaganda such that now the tightly held belief systems are going to have to reckon with the desire of all humanity to live with dignity, free from the oppressive tyranny that ignorance and bigotry have spawned.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS OF CANNABIS USERS

——————

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
——————
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
——————
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.
——————–
Whereas for too long now it has been observed that disregard and contempt for human rights has been allowed to exist in the body of politically motivated law that outlaws the possession, cultivation and use of cannabis by adults. The signatories of this Declaration wish to live in peace in this society, have been engaged in constant communication with their elected representatives individually or as part of groups. The actions of the government in this regards demonstrates continued contempt and disregard that we the undersigned feel that we have NO RECOURSE but to regard our government and some of our fellow citizens as hostile towards our declared rights and indifferent to the tyranny, oppression and terrorism that we have too long had to deal with.
——————-
Whereas by this declaration we provide the opportunity and impudence for representatives to engage in good faith negotiations which will lead to peaceful coexistence
———————
Whereas we the undersigned do hereby declare that IT IS OUR RIGHT to cultivate, possess and use cannabis AND that any law that says otherwise will be treated by us as the tool of tyranny.
———————-
Whereas we the undersigned in declaring our desire to realize our liberties and our desire to live in peace also recognize that the point is near where our rights and liberties will have to be defended.
———————-
Whereas we the undersigned are willing to do all we can to avoid conflict we hope that this WARNING also provides our fellow citizens and our representatives the impudence to also seek peace and understanding within our society.
—————-
Sincerely,

[Your name]
Dan Richeson

Freedom Brings All Kinds of Surprises

Posted on by

Skulls elongated by binding that look eerily alien found in an ancient burial site in Sonora of northern Mexico are proof that people have been making strange decisions about what they do to their bodies for a long time. Today piercings, mutilations and tattoos are the rage among some young people and boob implants and liposuction and Botox for others. Vain attempts to find a niche in society.

http://t.now.msn.com/alien-like-skulls-found-in-mexican-cemetery

Truth is, we’re all looking for ways to connect with those around us. We choose activities that we believe stir interest in others and trying to create fun and play are part of how we connect. Drinking alcohol has been a large part of that process for a long time because it lowers inhibitions and makes us more outgoing. It makes social connection a little easier to initiate. But alcohol also has a darker side and not everyone who drinks is affected in that way, but anyone who has been around drinking much have seen it, ” the violent mean drunk”, which is one of the reasons many people prefer marijuana. In 40 years of using marijuana and interacting with marijuana users, I have never seen a person get violent without due provocation under the influence of just marijuana. Can people under the influence of marijuana be provoked? The answer is certainly yes, but so can those who do no drugs. For many it is just a safer alternative to alcohol. A safer way to connect with those around us.

Only when we learn to accept or at least tolerate those among us that do things we may not favor or approve of will we ever truly be free.

Randy Johnson

Where Are The Dissenters

Posted on by

I have been speaking out about the legalization of marijuana for almost a year now and almost all of the comments I have received have been positive with the exception of a couple of people. I’m sure there are more people who read this blog that are opposed to my views. If you believe I am wrong, I would love to hear your reasoning. I’m not intending to start a fight but, I believe we need to have a conversation about our place in society. It can’t be that there is not enough room in this country for both of us. Prohibition harms everyone’s freedom. All we want is the right to live in peace with society. Please end the war against marijuana.

Randy Johnson

Why Do We Go To War

Posted on by

A few days ago, as I ate lunch at the park in front of the Hutchinson County Veterans Memorial. I started wondering what we fight for as a nation and individually, and why we send our sons and daughters to war. Words come to mind like, duty to country, honor, national defense, and security. Today our armed forces are all voluntary, but many of the soldiers honored here were drafted into service. Does that change the reasons we fight? Society needs to be able to assemble armies in its defense, even a conscript army if needed. The survival of our nation and way of life may demand such action. We faced real threats to our sovereignty and security in WWI and WII and so did our allies, but what about Korea and Vietnam? Was our sovereignty and security in danger then, or was that just our attempt to stop communist aggression amid the Cold War? Were we able to achieve those goals? I would call Korea a partial success. South Korea is a democratic country with an economy built on free enterprise and it is prospering. But the Korean people are divided, with their kin to the north governed by a desperate and aggressive despot, who rules his people with fear and punishment. And they are technically still at war with a real threat of the violence ensuing again. If we had not maintained a military presence there, it is very likely all of Korea would be under communist control today. None of our goals were met in Vietnam with the communists taking control of Saigon as we were leaving and yet, today they are a united, peaceful people. Who decides when we go to war and what the motivations are? The reasons to go to war are never simple and may cover any variety of considerations from economics to survival but certainly the preservation of our freedom should be one of the reasons we fight. Our nation was born with a struggle for freedom from the rule of England. Our Declaration of Independence lists a number of violations of basic human rights by the King and extols our right to shed that rule in favor of self-rule as all men are created equal with rights granted to us by God and not men. This was an act of treason under English rule and those who signed that document did so knowing that it put their lives and fortunes at risk, yet those brave men and those who fought by their side, did so willingly. Our Constitution goes further describing our rights as a people, by enumerating them in the bill of rights, to ensure that government would not be able to take them away. These are important rights that ensure that we can live safely and securely among others without the worry of being governed by tyrants.

All of our servicemen take an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. But how many of the recent wars we have been involved in were about a threat to our Constitution or the sovereignty and security of our nation? Were we defending an ally from a threat to their sovereignty or security? Certainly if our country is attacked we should respond in defense. Even preemptive strikes against known threats are justifiable, but all acts of war have consequences. Because of the brutality of war, some of our young will always be killed or wounded. And then there are the mental scars from being witness to the horrors of war. The fear of death or injury and seeing your friends killed or injured are hard to imagine, let alone learn to live with. Just the longing for home to reunite with the ones we love tends to wear on most people. And then there is the memory of the killing of others and watching the enemy suffer or die. Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among our servicemen is so great. War is a terrible thing for both sides of any conflict and even when the hostilities end, the painful memories of war endure. War should always be a last resort.

Our Congressmen and Senators also take the same oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, yet rarely do they face imminent danger in their daily lives. But their responsibility to defend the Constitution is just as important because they write the laws governing all aspects of our lives. They are on the front lines of protecting our freedom in the laws that they vote for or against. Their responsibility to ensure that all laws passed, maintain our freedoms as described in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence cannot be overstated. These  documents should be the guiding principle in all laws passed by Congress or signed into law by our President.

Often as I read the news and study current events I am reminded that not all members of Congress share the same reverence and respect for the Constitution of the United States. The recent debates about the right to keep and bear arms are a perfect example of that. Even before the Sandy Hook massacre, our right to keep and bear arms was seriously infringed and it was all done at the hand of Congress and backed up by past and current Presidents and supported by the Supreme Court. My second amendment right to keep and bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of these United States, yet our Congressional leaders have allowed a patchwork of differing laws governing our rights to bear arms to become the law of the land. Even if we follow the safe passage clause of the Firearm Owners Protection Act, we can still be in violation of state or local laws if we are delayed because of car trouble or if we are too tired to continue our journey. In order to pass through a state with restrictive firearm laws a person must unload and lock the gun in the trunk of their car and are not allowed to stop except for food and gas. Would we surrender our right to a trial by jury or our freedom of speech so easily? What about our freedom of religion? Isn’t our right to self-defense one of those rights granted by God?                          http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926A                                                                                  And what about the tenth amendment where the powers not delegated to the United States as described in the Constitution are reserved to the states or to the people? Do our Congressional leaders understand that? Where in the Constitution do they get the power to tell states that they cannot experiment with medical marijuana laws or even recreational marijuana laws? Our Congressional leaders should be actively defending our rights, not circumventing state law to keep us under the thumb of oppression. Since Congress authorized the oath of office for all Federal employees, they should know that they are obligated to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and our rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. We, as Americans, should demand and expect as much from them. Their obligation to preserve our Constitution and freedom should be no less important than that of our sons and daughters that we ask or require to risk life and limb in war.

The Constitution does not provide the wording for this oath, leaving that to the determination of Congress.  From 1789 until 1861, this oath was, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” During the 1860s, this oath was altered several times before Congress settled on the text used today, which is set out at 5 U. S. C. § 3331.  This oath is now taken by all federal employees, other than the President:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God.” http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oath/textoftheoathsofoffice2009.aspx

The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights   http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

Meet Michele Leonhart Drug Enforcement Administrator

Posted on by

This story at rawstory.com by Eric W. Dolan contains a video of The DEA Administrator being grilled about the Federal policy against marijuana.

In a grilling before the House Judiciary Subcommittee, Rep. Jared Polis of Colorado, asked Michele Leonhart if anything is more addictive or harmful than marijuana and she dodged the question several times and kept repeating that all illegal drugs are bad. Please keep in mind this is the person who is directly responsible for determining the schedule that all drugs are in and directly responsible for keeping marijuana in schedule one with heroin and LSD. Her immediate supervisor would be Attorney General Eric Holder. Also keep in mind that she as well as Eric Holder were nominated for their positions by President Obama and their policy will be a direct reflection of his if they want to keep their job. What I’m getting at is that President Obama has the authority and responsibility to stop the raids on medical marijuana that complies with state law by insisting that marijuana be rescheduled. This would also open the door for research into the efficacy of marijuana in the treatment of various diseases. How about it President Obama? Will you give us a serious answer or should we wait for the next puppet show?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/20/top-dea-agent-wont-admit-heroin-more-harmful-than-marijuana/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Leonhart

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

Will We Ever Learn To Get Along?

Posted on by

One of the problems we face on the issue of marijuana legalization is that people on both sides of the issue tend to ignore and discredit any information that does not agree with their preconceived notions about marijuana. The anti-marijuana groups, the Federal Government and several major medical organizations including the American Medical Association and the Institute of Medicine readily discount mountains of information about the efficacy of marijuana as a medicine, because as they repeat often, smoking is a crude way to administer medicine and smoking anything cannot be good for our respiratory system. This I might add is a very good argument. Many anti-marijuana groups including our government claim that almost all of the evidence supporting marijuana as medicine is anecdotal, based of the reports of people who use marijuana and that proper dosage can never be determined in a smoked product. This also is a very good argument. But as you read the DEA report titled “The DEA Position on Marijuana” you will find it also peppered with words and terms such as (may cause, could cause,  might cause and could be associated with) and lots of anecdotal information. On the other hand when people say that marijuana has never caused a death or that it is a miracle cure, it can hardly be proven and is hard to believe.  http://www.justice.gov/dea/docs/marijuana_position_2011.pdf

With literally millions of people using marijuana on a regular basis, I would be shocked to find no problems or adverse effects from marijuana use and both sides of the issue have plenty of information to present. One of the misconceptions that the Government uses is the increase in the prevalence of marijuana use, as a reason for drug dependency treatment. It is unclear how much of this is driven by people avoiding prosecution or prison by volunteering for drug rehabilitation or just to save their job. One thing is clear. The evidence presented by the government does not differentiate, but it is worth noting that marijuana dependency treatment increased as drug courts became more available.

Most things we choose to do as people come with inherent risks. When we choose our activities, we weigh those risks against the reasons we chose to participate in those activities. Sometimes we choose wisely and other times we do not. Some people have made careers out of bad decisions and prospered because of it. For example, Evel Knievel, who thrilled Americans with his dangerous dare-devil act of jumping his motorcycle and sometimes crashing spectacularly. How about the Jackass Movies where people regularly do stupid and dangerous things just for public acknowledgement or financial gain? Isn’t it odd that we will cheer someone for jumping buses with a motorcycle or riding a bicycle off a roof and then try to ruin the lives of those who choose to smoke marijuana? Isn’t it also odd that alcohol use is openly advertised and accepted and marijuana use is punished and its users shunned by society? Isn’t it also odd that we still claim to be a free people while seeking new ways to prohibit any activity we deem immoral, unhealthy, dangerous or offensive.

Ban on sack lunches. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-11/news/ct-met-school-lunch-restrictions-041120110410_1_lunch-food-provider-public-school

Ban on cloths lines. http://www.care2.com/causes/join-the-fight-to-legalize-clotheslines.html

Ban on large sugary drinks. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21201680?ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

Ban on tobacco use. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/ND-measure-would-reimburse-smoking-ban-costs-4217360.php

Ban on home gardens. http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2009/03/feds-to-ban-backyard-gardens.html

Ban on low rider pants. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-05-16/news/0405150320_1_louisiana-house-louisiana-legislator-ban-low-riding-pants

Ban on raw milk. http://wewantorganicfood.com/2007/10/31/healthy-raw-milk-outlawed-in-california/

Ban on lemonade stands. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/23/beck-as-crackdowns-on-lemonade-stands-mount-kids-will-learn-to-acquiesce-to-government/

Seat belt and helmet laws. http://www.motorists.org/seat-belt-laws/busybodies

Ban on dietary advice. http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/09/21/north-carolina-paleo-diet-blogger-locked-free-speech-fight

Challenge anyone? Type in any activity in BING or GOOGLE search followed by “ban” and see what comes up.

Only when we learn to accept people doing things that we may not like or agree with will we ever be truly free.

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

Will They Try To Confiscate Our Guns?

Posted on by

In light of the current gun legislation issues, I want to mention that almost all new guns available have been sold and any new arms or ammunition will likely be purchased soon on arrival. I have heard rumblings of resistance to gun confiscation and people are concerned about their freedom. Sheriffs and police across the country have vowed to fight gun confiscation. I also am concerned about my freedom and have been for a long time. How did states ever get the right to take away our Second Amendment right? Would we surrender our freedom of speech, or our right to a speedy trial of our peers for crossing a state line? Why should we have to give up the security of being armed to cross state lines. My right to keep and bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of these United States. I do not believe however that our government would ever attempt to disarm all Americans at one time. First they will begin with people who get caught with illegal drugs or alcohol violations. Then anyone who is involved in any domestic violence or fringe groups like Christians or Constitutionalists. Eventually they would like to completely disarm us, but any attempts of all out confiscation would likely promote an armed response. So goes the story of the frog in the pot. Heat it slowly and it won’t resist.

My sincere hope is that these people who are trying to take our freedom are voted out and replaced with people who honor the Constitution and believe in the rights of the people. However I am also very sceptical that will ever happen. In the last election, Congress had a less than 10% approval rating and yet over 90% were re-elected. I do fear armed responses to gun confiscations by SWAT teams may become a part of our future. The Government does have an alternate plan though. A friend who proudly served in the United States Army told me, in 1989, all soldiers had to swear an oath, that if ordered, they would fire on American Citizens. I wonder if that is still the case and if not when did it begin and end? I guess we can hope I am wrong. Voting them out wouldn’t be near as costly in American lives.

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

President Obama Could Fix the Medical Marijuana Problem

Posted on by

From what I have been reading, decisions about moving marijuana into a less stringent schedule than schedule 1 are in the hands of the the Attorney General with that authority granted in the Controlled Substance Act. The Attorney General has delegated that authority to the DEA Administrator. So far the DEA has not acknowledged any of the mountains of evidence of the efficacy of marijuana as a medicine. Instead they choose to fight all attempts to reschedule marijuana and ignore all evidence of marijuana’s lack of harm to society and the fact that it is overwhelmingly safer than the two most prominent recreational drugs in America, alcohol and tobacco.

In a Reason.com article written by Mike Riggs on Jan 22nd, http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/22/in-fight-over-marijuans-scheduling-appea

The Washington D.C., U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the DEA acted according to their rules in denying a rescheduling of marijuana. The Court did not consider whether the evidence presented as to marijuana’s efficacy was relevent to the issue but that the DEA had followed its own rules in reaching its decision.

According to the appeals court, the DEA was following its own rules (there are five in all) when it claimed that petitioners for rescheduling marijuana had failed to provide “adequate and well-controlled studies proving efficacy.”

Americans for Safe Access in turn argued “that their petition to reschedule marijuana cites more than two hundred peer-reviewed published studies demonstrating marijuana’s efficacy for various medical uses, and that those studies were largely ignored by the [DEA].”

“At bottom,” the court wrote, “the parties’ dispute in this case turns on the agency’s interpretation of its own regulations. Petitioners construe ‘adequate and well-controlled studies’ to mean peer-reviewed, published studies suggesting marijuana’s medical efficacy. The DEA, in contrast, interprets that factor to require something more scientifically rigorous.”

In other words, The DEA will not reschedule marijuana unless it would meet FDA approval. That is a very unlikely scenario when considering the close ties the FDA has with the pharmaceutical industry. However the decision to reschedule marijuana seems to swing on the opinion of the DEA Administrator of what is considered “adequate and well-controlled” medical studies, and “accepted safety”. Since this authority is delegated to the DEA Administrator by the Attorney General, surely the Attorney General could take that authority back. The office of the Attorney General as well as the office of the DEA Administrator are filled by appointment by the President of the United States. Surely the President would have enough influence over those he appoints to those positions to have them reschedule marijuana, either by Executive action or just replacing them with someone who would. While this would do nothing for the millions of recreational marijuana users. It would stop the raids that deny the sick and dying the medicine they believe improves their lives (palliative and curative), and the punishment of those who supply medical marijuana in compliance with state law. Although the President does not have the authority to legalize marijuana, the responsibilities for the current raids on medical marijuana are all his.

Thanks President  Obama

  • (b) Evaluation of drugs and other substances

The Attorney General shall, before initiating proceedings under subsection (a) of this section to control a drug or other substance or to remove a drug or other substance entirely from the schedules, and after gathering the necessary data, request from the Secretary a scientific and medical evaluation, and his recommendations, as to whether such drug or other substance should be so controlled or removed as a controlled substance. In making such evaluation and recommendations, the Secretary shall consider the factors listed in paragraphs (2), (3), (6), (7), and (8) of subsection (c) of this section and any scientific or medical considerations involved in paragraphs (1), (4), and (5) of such subsection. The recommendations of the Secretary shall include recommendations with respect to the appropriate schedule, if any, under which such drug or other substance should be listed. The evaluation and the recommendations of the Secretary shall be made in writing and submitted to the Attorney General within a reasonable time. The recommendations of the Secretary to the Attorney General shall be binding on the Attorney General as to such scientific and medical matters, and if the Secretary recommends that a drug or other substance not be controlled, the Attorney General shall not control the drug or other substance. If the Attorney General determines that these facts and all other relevant data constitute substantial evidence of potential for abuse such as to warrant control or substantial evidence that the drug or other substance should be removed entirely from the schedules, he shall initiate proceedings for control or removal, as the case may be, under subsection (a) of this section.

  • (c) Factors determinative of control or removal from schedules

In making any finding under subsection (a) of this section or under subsection (b) of section 812 of this title, the Attorney General shall consider the following factors with respect to each drug or other substance proposed to be controlled or removed from the schedules:

  • (1) Its actual or relative potential for abuse.
  • (2) Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known.
  • (3) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance.
  • (4) Its history and current pattern of abuse.
  • (5) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse.
  • (6) What, if any, risk there is to the public health.
  • (7) Its psychic or physiological dependence liability.
  • (8) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this subchapter. http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/ucm148726.htm#cntlsbb

As for the millions of recreational marijuana users, your best bet is to try to influence your Congressional leaders, or replace them with those in favor of legalization. It is very unlikely the Supreme Court would rule against Congress on the legality of marijuana. Without reasonable attempts to change Congress’ stance on marijuana the Supreme Court would be unlikely to even hear evidence.

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

3D Printing May Be The Key To Our Freedom

Posted on by

As the printing press helped to forge the way for freedom and the increase of knowledge in our history. I believe the 3D printer will usher in a new type of freedom. The freedom to create whatever you may wish or dream up. In light of the recent and current gun ban proposals, Defense Distributed is in the process of creating a sharable file to print a working gun on a 3D printer. They have tested an AR15 that was built with a lower receiver that was printed on a 3D printer. It successfully fired 6 rounds before it broke. While it may seem as though a printed gun is too fragile to be useful, the technology is still new and developing rapidly. Also new technologies are emerging to print in different medias such as different polymers, glass, stone, ceramic and various metals. It will be near impossible to keep guns away from people if they can be printed at home.                                                                             http://defensedistributed.com/about-us/                                               http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/12/03/heres-what-it-looks-like-to-fire-a-partly-3d-printed-gun-video/                                                                                                                          These Printers are becoming available to hobbyists for prices ranging from $2200 dollars and up. Larger more expensive 3D printers are being made that will print in more than one media at the same time. As these 3D printers become more widely used, greater capability will be available at lower cost to the home hobbyist, or anyone for that matter. Soon a 3D printer may be as common in our homes as microwave ovens and computers. Similar to the replicators on Star Trek Next Generation, 3D printers will be able to create many household items we currently use, for example you may want to design and print parts for a lamp and assemble it yourself. At least one company, RepRap, plans to build a 3D printer that can print copies of itself, making it a self replicating printer. It is already capable of printing some of its parts and work is underway to complete the task.  Fab@Home printer lists chocolate as one of its printable medias. As this technology evolves, who knows what may or may not be possible. Consider that we may soon be able to print medicines or household chemicals or maybe a part to repair your car. How about a replacement hip where the ball is permanently made into the socket. The possibilities are almost endless.    http://fabathome.com/                         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RepRap_Project             http://www.stratasys.com/Products/Overview.aspx  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

The War Against Marijuana Users Is Based On Lies

Posted on by

The war against marijuana and its users is based on lies and misinformation. Laws built on lies should not stand.

The National Commission on Drug Abuse was created by law under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 to study marijuana to see if it really belonged in the schedule one class of drugs with heroin and LSD. The commission consisted of two members appointed by the President of the Senate and two appointed by the President of the House of Representatives and nine appointed by President Nixon. The 39th Governor of Pennsylvania, Raymond P. Shafer was the chairman. When Richard Nixon appointed people to this commission, he had advised them that marijuana should be treated as heroin and it should be demonized, and he made several attempts to influence the outcome of the report. Nixon reportedly told Schafer,”You’re enough of a pro to know that for you to come out with something that would run counter to what the Congress feels and what the country feels, and what we’re planning to do, would make your commission just look bad as hell.” When the report was released titled “Marijuana A Signal of Misunderstanding”, it denied any relation with marijuana use with the crime and violence portrayed in the propaganda from decades past. The report also found little evidence of physical or psychological harm with casual use. It questioned the constitutionality of marijuana prohibition, advocated removing marijuana from the schedule one category of drugs, and asked that criminal penalties be removed for sale and possession marijuana. The report met stiff resistance in Congress and subcommittee hearings were held in 1974. led by Senator James O. Eastland where experts from other countries presented evidence and it was concluded that marijuana is far more hazardous than previously thought. The original report “Marijuana a Signal of Misunderstanding” was buried and marijuana was labeled as public enemy #1 in the war on drugs.

http://www.csdp.org/publicservice/nixon06.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Commission_on_Marihuana_and_Drug_Abuse

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/801.htm

It’s also interesting that marijuana is not listed in the DEA list of drugs and chemicals of concern yet they still claim that marijuana is a danger to society.

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/801.htm

A U.S. Department of Justice report titled Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments written by Michael R. Rand reads, “In 14% of the violence-related injuries treated in ED’s in 1994, the ED record indicated that the victim or someone else involved in the incident had been drinking or using drugs. This estimate should be considered a lower bound of the percentage of injuries involving alcohol or drugs. Usually the ED’s did not test patients for intoxication but indicated alcohol or drug involvement if cited by patients or other involved persons or if ER personnel observed the patient under the influence of alcohol or drugs.” “Almost all of the alcohol/drug citations on the hospital records reflected alcohol involvement. Drugs were cited on the hospital record in less than 1% of all violence-related injuries treated.”

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/VRITHED.PDF

The United States Government also owns a patent (6630507) on marijuana that describes in detail the medical benefits associated with marijuana.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507.html

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

“If this plant were discovered in the Amazon today, scientists would be falling all over each other to be the first to bring it to market,” said Dr. Donald Abrams, chief of oncology at the University of California San Francisco, which has also found science behind marijuana’s efficacy.

http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/nbc-news-marijuana-compound-fights-cancer-human-trials-next/

The United States Government has known that marijuana has curative powers over cancer since 1974 yet hid this from the public to continue this failed war on marijuana and its users.

U.S. KNEW IN ’74… AND AGAIN IN ’96!

This wasn’t always the case. In fact, the first ever experiment documenting pot’s anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, immortalized in an August 18, 1974 Washington Post newspaper feature, were that “THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”

Despite these favorable preliminary findings, U.S. government officials banished the study, and refused to fund any follow up research until conducting a similar – though secret – study in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls. However, rather than publicize their findings, government researchers shelved the results – which only became public one year later after a draft copy of its findings were leaked in 1997 to the journal AIDS Treatment News, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.

Nevertheless, in the nearly eight years since the completion of the National Toxicology trial, the U.S. government has yet to fund a single additional study examining pot’s potential as an anti-cancer agent.
Have they no shame or humility?

http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/marijuana-cures-cancer-us-government-has-known-since-1974/#comment-14964

Please call or write to your leaders in Washington, DC and tell them you want an end to the prohibition of marijuana.

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org