We are throwing people in jail because they don't have a doctors note for their painkillers. Does anyone else see the MADNESS of that? Am I taking crazy pills!?!? It's criminally insane, truly.
The elements of a crime are injury and intent. Actus Reus and Mens rea. When someone possess or sells something, anything, neither are present. Certainly medicines/drugs.
The only people who benefit, besides the medical cartels, are cops, judges, prisons, lawyers and the KM/DS.
Also, if "they" want someone in jail or dead, all they need to do is plant some "drugs" on them and that's all she fucking wrote. Done.
All drugs need to be legalized immediately and sold to adults in drug stores, pure and clean. All the associated crime/gangs will disappear overnight. It's the ONLY solution. We MUST drop the brainwashing and face this.
They had been fighting the biker gangs in Canada for decades, at great cost. They legalized weed and the bikers were put mostly out of business almost overnight. If they legalized everything else, they'd be totally gone.
Using the criminal law to parent adults is fucked up beyond measure.
Many countries do not require prescriptions the way the U.S. does, and except for a few specifically illegal drugs, pharmacies can dispense whatever the customer requests.
It should be like buying coffee. If I want 9 sugars, the hot 25 year old waitress gets it for me, no questions asked. I don't know the hot 25 year old pharmacist has any more say in what painkillers I want.
"Get me my meds and shut your fucking mouth."
Alcohol prohibition proved, beyond any doubt, that the dangers and other harms of prohibition (creation of a POLICE STATE, including secret-police agencies, the government's ability to imprison anyone via planting the prohibited item on the patsy, creation of hyper-violent gangs creating and selling the banned-yet-highly-desired product, massive levels of police, court, and other government corruption as Al Capone and other extremely wealthy bootleggers bought the cooperation of police, judges, and others, and near-total lack of product safety (many died or went blind from bad booze, just as many today are dying from unknown composition and dosage of street drugs) leading to more deaths than were previously caused by LEGAL drug use.
But boy, did those In Power miss having those Police-State laws and Agencies.
Well said. Thanks for the great comment.
Then when it was legalized, and heavily taxed, people used to drink the antiseptic stuff from the pharmacy to avoid said taxes. So the government added poison to get their tax money. But the poison just gave people headaches so they drank it anyway. So then the government upped to the poison and killed 10,000 people. Government gangsters wanted their money. Still doing it. Rubbing alcohol is Isopropyl alcohol now when it should be ethanol, but that would cut into the tax money so we get Iso. That's who we are dealing with.
They don't miss it, because they still have it. Booze laws became drug laws, same staff enforcing it. Same problems as you mentioned.
ivermectin proved this
Exactly!
They'll throw people in jail for too that if they can.
I mean, Portugal did it and the results are pretty damn good all things considering
Portugal's drug decriminalization policy, implemented in 2001, has had significant impacts on overdose rates and crime statistics. Here are the key points:
Overdose Deaths: Portugal has seen a dramatic reduction in drug overdose deaths. In the first five years after the reforms, drug deaths dropped dramatically. They rose slightly in the following years but returned to 2005 levels, with only 10 drug overdose deaths recorded in 2011. As of 2024, Portugal's drug overdose death rate is the second-lowest in the European Union, with 3 deaths per 1,000,000 citizens, compared to the EU average of 17.3 per million. The country's approach has been credited with reducing the risk of overdose and death for drug users, who have access to free healthcare and addiction treatment.
Crime Rates: The decriminalization of drug use has also led to a significant change in the profile of the prison population. In 2001, over 40% of the sentenced Portuguese prison population were held for drug offenses, which was considerably above the European average. By 2019, this proportion had fallen dramatically to 15.7%, below the European average. Drug-related street crime in Portugal has also dropped, contrary to fears that decriminalization would lead to a "wild west" scenario.
Drug Use and HIV Infections: The prevalence of past-year and past-month drug use among young adults has fallen since 2001, and overall adult use is down slightly. New HIV cases among drug users have also decreased significantly. For example, new HIV diagnoses due to injecting have plummeted from 907 in 2000 to 18 in 2017.
Challenges and Recent Trends: Despite the overall positive outcomes, there have been some recent challenges. Overdose rates have reached a 12-year high and have doubled in Lisbon since 2019. Crime rates, often seen as loosely related to illegal drug addiction, rose 14% from 2021 to 2022. Sewage samples of cocaine and ketamine rank among the highest in Europe, and drug encampments have appeared in some areas.
These statistics highlight the complex nature of drug policy and the ongoing need for comprehensive health and social services to support drug users.
^those "recent challenges"... could perhaps be due to an influx of "migrants"..
Something in my soul cringes at the thought of a government making objects illegal. I extend this to grenades and tanks, of course 😊
Thanks for the great comment.
Of course. Kek. If you can convince your wife you need an F-16, who the fuck are politicians to get involved?
They only decriminalized possession, a half measure.
They didn't make it available at pharmacies. The dealers maintained their monopoly.
We already tried that. It has just been erased from taught history. That is why we have the drug laws.
I disagree.
Imagine if the illegal drugs did not exist and pain medicine was not addictive. The equivalent could be achieved.
The governments job is to protect our rights, including our right to use addictive substances. Not to parent us.
I agree, but the combination of welfare and cheap, legal drugs would be like a stick of dynamite. And the problem with weed before age 26 is that it tends to wipe out the part of the brain responsible for your conscious.
But nothing. The governments job is to protect our rights, including our right to use addictive substances. Not to parent us from the barrel of a gun.
Also, drug "laws" are morally and logically wrong. The past is irrelevant.
The idea of making all drugs legal is part of the Libertarian's platform. There's a lot of reasons for drugs being illegal. None of them are good ones. There's a lot of money being made in the illegal drug business. Lawyers, the courts, the prisons, the federal and local police, doctors... Oh yeah, the actual importers and all the way down to the street level crack dealer, I almost forgot. Illegal drug business is their life blood. These systems are dependent on the fact that recreational street drugs are illegal. The old saying of, "When guns are made illegal only criminals will have guns" can be applied to drugs. I'm pretty sure that the legal/prison systems make more money than the suppliers from the illegal drug laws.
The fact is that some people are going to use drugs, period. The solution is make all drugs legal. Control the quality of them and eliminate the criminality of the industry, spend a fraction of the money to help those that are hopelessly addicted and yes, tax the sale of them.
The problem is that politicians have campaigned on drug law platforms for a very long time and it's hard to take the anti drug laws away considering the fact that the system is as addicted to the laws as a heroin addict is to heroin.
You can’t charge a 3000% markup with out the control systems in place.
The dealers/manufacturers make HUGE profits. The government can compete cheaper and make big money. Even if they can't, it's irrelevant.
The elements of a crime are injury and intent. Actus Reus and Mens rea. When someone possess or sells something, anything, neither are present
The governments job is to protect our rights, not to parent us from the barrel of a gun.
Sorry I should have added sarc/ to my comment my bad. Preacher meet Choir. My son’s medication monthly is almost 5 grand without insurance. My point was the greed is feeding the machine. I agree completely
Kek. My mistake, you didn't need the /s. I was stuck in defensive mode, you got caught in the crossfire. Sorry.
Reminds me of a guy who had to buy 3-4 inhalers a month, at $30 each, to keep his daughter alive. The patent changed hands and the new owner wanted to make some money so they added a zero to the price.
Now an extra shift a month turned into a second job, just to keep his daughter alive. They knew people needed it to stay alive and would pay any price, that's why they picked that drug. Absolute criminals.
Long story short he found some anons online (I know a guy, who knows a guy, who knows another guy, kek) who helped him find a supplier from India on the dark web, where inhalers were $4 each, free delivery if he bought a case.
He bought a case. Daughter alive and well, now the drug company gets nothing. Heartwarming story.
No worries I get it . -Wow that’s awesome. I genuinely believe with out the anons who have advised us my son would be dead even with the medication. My hope is a cure and then no more meds. I believe we are getting there. This time last year I was afraid he wouldn’t survive now I am wondering when he will be cured fully. He is now off all but two meds and doing better then ever with naturopath alternatives and by treatment for parasites. The last two I have yet to find an alternative for and unfortunately they are the most expensive but I have hope. It is a special evil to make people suffer whilst pretending your healing
I was reading your post history. Jesus money-changer-whipping Christ, that's tough. Your courage and love for your son is inspirational. I really pray for everything to work out better than you could even dream.
In an unrelated matter, ;-) In addition to the other stuff I mentioned, I was reading about fenbendazole and B17. Interesting stuff.
We are working with a naturopath now and trying the B17 his liver is compromised so we can’t do fenbendazole yet. It has been a journey for sure. I am glad it reads inspiring he is for sure. Me I am mostly flying by the seat of my pants any thing I am actually doing well gotta give the credit to God for sure.So as I share this journey I am glad it isn’t doom and gloom and fear because in truth ALL that did nothing to help and it was my son’s determination and God’s grace and a lot of help in unexpected places that has kept him alive and me somewhat sane.I genuinely feel that all this is bigger then me or my son. It feels like God’s story.
Anons are the best! Like Q said, history will remember us fondly. The world would never know about MMS, DMSO, Methylene blue, IVM, HCQ, medical clay, vaxx dangers, Iodine, Boron, Vitamins, etc, etc, etc, without the web and the selfless dedication of Anons.
Prayers for your son. Glad things are moving in the right direction.
Thank you prayer is a gift and we have seen it. Truly it is deeply appreciated
Sir, do you have a prescription for those crazy pills?
^^^
Underrated comment.
Kek.
I wish I could pin this comment to the top.
The governments job is to protect our rights, not to parent us from the barrel of a gun.
The notion comes from the Declaration of Independence, based in millennia of Common Law.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,
The elements of a crime are injury and intent. Actus Reus and Mens rea. When someone possess or sells something, anything, neither are present.
The governments job is not to parent us from the barrel of a gun.
Thanks for the comment. You make some good points, it's a lot to unpack but I'll try.
Not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean protect us from tyranny? When I say "parent" I mean telling us how to live and behave, like a parent would. Telling us what medicines to take or not take, and worse, using the criminal law and sending men with guns when they don't like our choices, choices that do not cause injury to others. u/narg explains this very eloquently in the comment section of the following post. The linked article is great too.
Gang Deportations Are a Fool’s Errand; Instead, End the Drug War
https://greatawakening.win/p/19AxQ4Q20z/gang-deportations-are-a-fools-er/
The government protects our rights by prosecuting those who would violate them but also by not prosecuting us when we use our rights in an unpopular way, think the 1A and 2A. If I defend myself and someone tries to charge me, it's the governments job to tell them to fuck off, thereby protecting my rights. Ideally, that's how it should work. I protect myself, the government protects me after the fact. I offend someone, they attack me, I shoot them.... no crime.
Injury and intent are the elements of a crime, but in order to prosecute that crime we need a claimant with standing. For example, if my buddy gets robbed or beaten it's up to him to press charges. I can't press charges because it doesn't affect me directly so I don't have standing, my buddy does.
It's more complicated when we talk about fentanyl from China. It's not a matter of criminal law but of international law. If we have a problem with another county we can use sanctions or tariffs or even bombs to deal with them. If someone sells fentanyl inside our borders, and it's labeled properly, there is no crime. If someone sells fentanyl when it's labeled heroin, we have a problem. The main issue here is that people don't want fentanyl, they want heroin. If they could buy pure cheap heroin at the pharmacy there would be no demand for fentanyl. People don't usually want to die, the OD's are accidental from street drugs with zero quality control. If someone want's to die, they'll find a way and it's on them, it doesn't injure others. It sounds cold blooded, but the government can't stop me from having morphine in my survival kit because someone may kill themselves with it or use it recreationally.
Things aren't criminal, behavior is.
Me too!
It's evil, but I see it not as crime but as an international incident, maybe an act of war even.
Sounds good.
What did you think of the comment and article I mentioned?
Yes, as their second job.
offer public services.
If something is declared dangerous by a government agency, and it is put in food without being labeled then we have as case. We can have a criminal trial if we have a claimant with standing, Then the prosecution will have to prove TO A JURY the substance was in fact dangerous and it was added knowingly and surreptitiously. Then, and only then, can we deprive someone of their liberty by jailing them, because both elements of a crime were proved in a court of competent jurisdiction. This then creates precedent but if a new case happens it will have to be proved to a new jury, who can follow precedent or not.
Wait a minute, OP. Think about Cocaine. 99% of the population thinks it is a bad substance. Sure. Even if you were to legalize it and set it on a shelf in Walmart at a price of $1000/gram, people who are addicted to it will not want to pay that price. Well, they will begin to cook it illegally and the drug trade begins anew. Or do I have that wrong?
The elements of a crime are injury and intent. Actus Reus and Mens rea. When someone possess or sells something, anything, neither are present
The governments job is to protect our rights, not to parent us from the barrel of a gun.
Cocaine can be harvested and legally produced for about the same price as sugar.
That's the problem with the decriminalization that follows CO's original premise. It makes the state a part of the criminal element, it doesn't remove any criminality. The result? The black market still exists because weed grows everywhere and it's ridiculously cheap. The legal stuff is about triple the cost (or was) and now the government is moving aggressive to get the "illegal" weed cleaned up so that they can monopolize the money.
There should be no control. You do something stupid, like drive impaired, then you have an offense.
I might be convinced about purity standards and testing, but that should still be a consumer protection function - a batch tests bad and it's all pulled and refunded at the expense of the company that made it - not a law enforcement function.
^^^^^
There is still a thriving street cannabis market. No reason to think the same wouldn't occur with other drugs. Just because a legal and regulated channel exists doesn't mean that will eliminate the street market.
There's a street market for everything, who gives a fuck?
Try to apply that idea to alcohol, MJS. See: Al Capone.