YOU'VE BEEN DRAFTED=Spy for the Government

by **k_semler** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 19:17:05

A bill is now before the house pitting neighbor against neighbor. Seems like this was done before in a little place called Germany, with a little tyrant named Adolf Hitler. http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DownsizeDC.org', '[')b]YOU'VE BEEN DRAFTED UNCLE SAM WANTS YOU FOR THE WAR ON DRUGS

Congressman Sensenbrenner's (R-Wis.) draconian mandatory minimum sentencing bill will have serious consequences for our democracy, requiring you to spy on all your neighbors, including going undercover and wearing a wire if needed. Refusing to become a spy for the government would be punishable by a mandatory prison sentence of at least two years.

If you "witness" certain drug offenses taking place or "learn" that they took place you would have to report the offense to law enforcement within 24 hours and provide "full assistance" in the investigation, apprehension, and prosecution of the people involved. Failure to do so would be a crime punishable by a mandatory two year prison sentence.

Here are some examples of offenses you would have to report to the police within 24 hours:
* You see someone you know pass a joint to a 20-year old college student.
* Your cousin mentions that he bought Ecstasy for some of his college friends.
* You find out that your brother, who has kids, recently bought a small amount of marijuana to share with his wife.
* Your substance-abusing daughter recently begged her boyfriend to find her some drugs even though they're both in drug treatment.

For more information, we encourage you to click on the Background button above. Act now. Send Congress a message before it's too late.

* If you've used our lobbying system before just enter your user email address and password below. Then hit GO. You'll be taken to a screen where you can add your own comments to the message to Congress.
* If you're new to the Downsize DC lobbying system please complete the form for first time users. This information is needed to direct your message to your specific Representative and Senators, and for them to confirm that you are one of their constituents. Please provide your entire ZIP+4, as this is necessary for your House Representative to be determined (the system will not work without the whole ZIP code.) Please provide your own password. Do not let the system create one for you. Remember your password. It will enable you to use our system easily in the future for other issues.
Thank you.
Jim Babka
President, DownsizeDC.org

by **Specop_007** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 19:31:16

I'm not entirely opposed to cracking down on drug use, but this shit is getting out of hand

by **k_semler** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 20:00:10

I agree. Any law requring me to narc on a person who is only doing something which pleases himself and does not harm others is over the line as far as I am concerned. I can understand passing a law requring informing authorities if a direct threat of murder is made, or if a person says "I'm going to go kill <Joe Blow>." n I can understand that, but this is just stupid.

by **Falconoffury** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 20:06:28

The government doesn't pay me enough to act in any sort of law enforcement capacity. They pay me nothing, and they take taxes.

by **Specop_007** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 20:14:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Falconoffury', 'T')he government doesn't pay me enough to act in any sort of law enforcement capacity. They pay me nothing, and they take taxes.

by **ArimoDave** » Thu 02 Jun 2005, 20:23:53

I don't think this would hold up in the courts -- it seem a clear violation of the Constitution.
If police officers don't have the duty to protect the citizens, only the duty to investigate
after a crime has been committed, I don't think that a private person can be compelled to
report any criminal activity. If one were to witness such an act, that person may also be
directly involved. If that person is directly involved, then fifth amendment protections
clearly apply.

Mandated reporting by certain persons due to their particular occupations
where they are
deemed experts or are in a protective capacity (doctors, public school teachers, etc)
is one thing, but to make a private person a mandated reporter of suspicious activity
would be ripe for abuses.

How do you know what that white powder was in that plastic bag. Maybe the one guy
was just returning a cup of sugar he borrowed the other day for a cake, and the money
transfered was repayment of a personal loan.

Anybody else smell trial lawyers eager for the chance to sue just about everybody?

ArimoDave

by **MicroHydro** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 01:19:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ArimoDave', 'I') don't think this would hold up in the courts -- it seem a clear violation of the Constitution.

by **k_semler** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 01:45:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MicroHydro', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ArimoDave', 'I') don't think this would hold up in the courts -- it seem a clear violation of the Constitution.

by **highlander** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 02:07:37

Great legislation. Look at the results of the last ten years of the "war on drugs" Except for the short reprieve when the taliban took out the poppy fields, drug use in this country has escalated as the amount spent on the war has increased. Our wise leaders are taking the same tack on their "war on terror" Another twenty years of this and there will be nobody left except druggies and terrorists :shock:

by **k_semler** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 02:14:05

Replace all references to drugs to references to Jews, and you will see why I am against this legislation. Zieg Hiel Mien Furhrer!

by **dmtu** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 02:23:39

Ksem,
How the hell do you keep abreast of all these different issues? What others sites do you surf?

by **k_semler** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 02:30:44

I go to this site, Survivor's SKS Boards, Frugal Squirrels, AK-47.net, AR15.com, JFPO.org, govtrack.us, slashdot.org, WorldNetDaily, Rense.com, The Drudge Report, ieXbeta, OS News, OS Beta Archive, etc. I also have live RSS feeds from: ABC News: International, BBC News: International, Forbes Headline News, and Reuters International.

by **Grimnir** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 04:51:50

This hasn't been passed, and probably won't be. Congressman pretty routinely write stuff like this knowing it will be struck down so they can tell their constituents that they tried.

Incidentally, Sensenbrenner was also behind the "The Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to suspend any law" bill a little while ago.

by **TheSupplyGuy** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 08:17:30

And there are people who support this guy?!?!
Then again, my former senator 'Fritz' Hollings wanted to do the minimum military sevice thing for everyone.

by **sklump** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 10:32:56

Ha ha!

You want to curb drug use?

Quit funding the CIA and revoke Halliburton's [subsidiary KBR aka Kellogg Brown Root, formerly Brown & Root] corporate charter, shown decade after decade to manage international drug money to prop up the US economic miracle, and keep a supply of filthy lucre at their disposal for extra-legal activity.

Notice what happened to the Afghan poppy crop once the CIA moved in?

by **k_semler** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 18:33:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Grimnir', 'T')his hasn't been passed, and probably won't be. Congressman pretty routinely write stuff like this knowing it will be struck down so they can tell their constituents that they tried.

Incidentally, Sensenbrenner was also behind the "The Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to suspend any law" bill a little while ago.

by **k_semler** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 18:35:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheSupplyGuy', 'A')nd there are people who support this guy?!?!
Then again, my former senator 'Fritz' Hollings wanted to do the minimum military sevice thing for everyone.

by **ArimoDave** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 22:56:39

There, of course, is an easy way to curb illegal drug activity -- you make it legal.
But, at the same time you need to set some limits, like when and where one may
partake, and impose a moderate tax on the substances. If the tax is too high that will
encourage illegal trafficking. Also, impose strict penalties for violating the laws
about when and where one is permitted to use the drugs. If you take the novelty
out of drug use, and have revenue created by users to treat addicts, you may end
up with less use and abuse.

Though, I really don't think that this is necessarily a good idea.

ArimoDave

by **jdmartin** » Fri 03 Jun 2005, 23:59:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ArimoDave', 'T')here, of course, is an easy way to curb illegal drug activity -- you make it legal.
But, at the same time you need to set some limits, like when and where one may
partake, and impose a moderate tax on the substances. If the tax is too high that will
encourage illegal trafficking. Also, impose strict penalties for violating the laws
about when and where one is permitted to use the drugs. If you take the novelty
out of drug use, and have revenue created by users to treat addicts, you may end
up with less use and abuse.

Though, I really don't think that this is necessarily a good idea.

ArimoDave

by **k_semler** » Sat 04 Jun 2005, 00:04:53

I would support that. It's not like most of the population is going to go out and snort a few lines just because cocaine is legalised. If people want to take a trip and never leave the farm, I say they should be able to do it so long as nobody is hurt by thier activities.

YOU'VE BEEN DRAFTED=Spy for the Government

YOU'VE BEEN DRAFTED=Spy for the Government

Who is online