Does the federal government refuse to support marijuana legalization?

In the year 1919 everyone knew that we needed a Constitutional Amendment to ban a substance.*
The same is true today.  Do not be fooled by legislation pretending to ban a substance. The drug laws are all derived from truth-in-labeling laws.

Everyone has a right to self-medicate. It is part of the right to self-defense against corporal assaults. And governments are instituted among men to secure those rights.

Back in 1919 everyone knew that no authority existed for government to ban a substance, so wackos demanded a Constitutional Amendment to ban liquor. The Amendment itself said that congress had the power to enforce it by appropriate legislation. The Amendment was NOT self-enforcing as part of the Supreme Law of the Land which would bind judges in every State (as required by Article 6).

It had to be enforced by legislation onto State courts.  We repealed the 18th Amendment in 1931 after creating too many criminals yearning to breathe free.

Don’t be fooled. We still need a Constitutional Amendment to ban substances. [Civil] Servants do not control their masters.

No one has a right to interfere with regulated commerce. Pharmacies are regulated under the commerce laws. Drug laws prohibit licensed pharmacists from possessing the unregulated untaxed drugs because there is a presumption that they possess it for the criminal intent of adulterating the pure (taxed in commerce) stuff.

The United States has the highest per-capita incarceration rate of all the nations on earth. Higher than any totalitarian regime anywhere on earth. American’s live in the least free country in the world.


Government was created to protect rights. If drugs are a right, then how can government get away with putting so many people in prison?

Many people are fooled into thinking that drugs are illegal. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Many people are in prison for confessing to crimes that never happened. Prosecutors put a lot of effort into convincing snitches and juries that drug laws make drugs illegal. 34% of our prisoners are in prison because informant criminals were rewarded for their testimony, according to a book on snitching. It is the snitches that create evidence that drugs are a crime. This snitch-created evidence (the affidavit suborned by the prosecutor) is then used in court to arrest and convict the harmless, while corrupt aggressive prosecutors remain free to bully others. Juries are tricked into believing that drugs are criminal, even though the drug statutes are never codified with the criminal laws.
The United States Supreme Court In REID v. GEORGIA, 448 U.S. 438 (1980) explains Reid’s fourth and fifth amendment rights. Mr. Reid was a passenger arriving in Atlanta on a flight from Columbia with a duffle bag full of cocaine. He was stopped at the airport by federal agents of the Drug Enforcement Agency. He consented to a search of his bag. He then ran, abandoning his bag. What do you think happened? Read the case.

What about prescription medications? – Why do you need government authorization (a prescription from a government licensed, government regulated doctor) in order to buy what was once a considered an absolute inalienable right, a right to fight disease and pain — A right equal to any other self-defense against bodily assaults?

A right of self-defense includes a right to fight any affliction — including mental depression, pain, or anger — not just disease. “We The People” created our government. All political power is vested in the posterity.* Did we really delegate to government any authority to regulate our neighbor’s right to anesthesia?

Does your State now impair your right to take care of yourself?

History topic #1: Liberty includes Your right to take care of yourself.

Government exists to protect rights. You have a right to take care of yourself. If you need to take care of yourself, then begging for permission to buy medications — or any other necessity of life — is not something government can require. They cannot deny rights while claiming that they are protecting rights.
Why do politicians assume that their constituents (posterity of “We The People” who created their office, and elected them) are so irresponsible that we cannot be trusted take care of ourselves? Their job is to protect our rights. Every adult has a right to treat their own medical conditions and suffer the side effects. Yes, even Elvis, Marilyn, Hendrix, Belushi, Morrison, Sigmund Freud, Anna Nicole, Bruce Lee, Howard Hughes, Judy Garland, Andy Gibb, Chris Farley, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston as well as everyone of us.
Everyone’s right to contract with others to preserve his/her own health is an unalienable right, a “natural liberty which is not required by the laws of society to be sacrificed to public convenience”. (According to Blackstone’s Commentary on the Law. By the way, the Supreme Court considers Blackstone’s Commentary as the received law-of-the-land as it existed when the original states wrote their constitutions.)
The right to self medicate is as sacred as any other right to self-defense. Everyone is “entitled by the same natural right to security from the corporal insults.”
Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, during the Constitutional debates in 1787:
“The Constitution of this Republic should make special provision for medical freedom. To restrict the art of healing to one class will constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic. … Unless we put medical freedom into the constitution the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship and force people who wish doctors and treatment of their own choice to submit to only what the dictating outfit offers.”


Government exists to protect rights.
Before the original 13 State Constitutions were written, the ONLY prescription drug law was for slaves. Slaves needed their owner’s permission to take drugs.
When America became a free country, the Constitution abolished the only drug law that existed, even though the slaves were not yet free. Law textbooks said that Slave rights had been “wholly annihilated, or reduced to a shadow” and that the Constitution changed this. (quote is from Tucker’s 1803 Virginia law encyclopedia Book 1, Part 2, Note H “The state of slavery”)
That’s right. Prescription drug laws were too harsh in America, even for slaves.
If you are denied the right to take care of yourself, or require permission from your owner, then perhaps your rights have also been “wholly annihilated, or reduced to a shadow”. If you think that there is a law that restricts drug purchasing, then you are worse off than a slave. Don’t claim to live in a free country if you have never seen liberty.

Summary, so far. Prior to the Constitution, drug prescription laws applied only to slaves. After the United States became a nation, the drug laws had to be removed so that the slaves would have a right to take care of themselves. Prescription drug laws, being unconstitutional, were too cruel to the slaves.


Government exists to protect rights. Can there be a law prohibiting someone from medicating himself in whatever manner he chooses?


Blackstone’s Commentaries Book 1 “Rights of Persons” (First Edition, Claredon Press, Oxford, 1769) explains our rights as they existed in the received law-of-the-land when the 13 original states wrote their constitutions.

“And these may be reduced to three principal or primary articles ; the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty ; and the right of private property : because as there is no other known method of compulsion, or of abridging man’s natural free will, but by an infringment or diminution of one or other of these important rights, the preservation of these, inviolate, may justly be said to include the preservation of our civil immunities in their largest and most extensive sense.”
I. THE right of personal security consists in a person’s legal and uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his reputation…..
The commentary continues with a discussion of punishments, including dismembering of a limb. Keep in mind that the US Constitution Amendment 5 requires due process to take “life or limb”.
Page 130…
3. BESIDES those limbs and members that may be necessary to man, in order to defend himself … the rest of his person or body is also entitled by the same natural right to security from the corporal insults of menaces …. though such insults amount not to destruction of life or member.
4.THE preservation of a man’s health from such practices as may prejudice or annoy it, ….”

In many States, the common law is still the rule of decision in all courts.

History topic #4: PRESCRIPTION LAWS

Prescription laws are consumer protection laws to prohibit corrupt pharmacists from diluting the pure drugs with uncontrolled substances.
A rule of statute construction (especially if there is no legislated “express words of nullity” to prove that a law changed the original intent): Verba debent intelligi cum effectu ut res magis valeat quam pereat Words ought to be understood with effect, that a thing may rather be preserved than destroyed.

The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 required truthful labels and prohibited tampering with drugs before the pharmacists received them. (and this was back in the days where Coca-Cola contained cocaine – when we were a free country, and the Sears Catalog had opium).

The Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938 enacted prescription drug laws to ensure the purity of high-quality pharmaceuticals for those who could afford the pure drugs. I have no objection to pure pharmaceuticals being made available to those who can afford the higher quality. This seems like a perfectly acceptable law.
Prior to 1938 all drugs were available without a prescription. Everyone could self-medicate. From 1938 to 1951 manufacturers of drugs made the determination to require a doctor’s prescription. Fears of lawsuits over side effects were the driving factor in their decisions. No one was denied the right to fight their own diseases, provided that doctors kept them informed of the dangers. If you wanted to damage yourself with full awareness of the likely consequences, then no jury was going to compensate you for your injury.
The Durham-Humphrey Amendment of 1951 set the stage for FDA oversight of [ perfectly legitimate ] prescription drug laws. A seemingly acceptable governmental function.
As you can see, none of the written laws destroyed the “natural liberty which is not required by the laws of society to be sacrificed to public convenience”.
Then States started closing the back door to pharmacies, thereby denying a necessity of life. It was only the enforcement efforts — the misconstruing of legitimate laws — that blocked your right to self medicate.

History topic #5: RIGHT TO SELF MEDICATE

Notice that drug laws are not codified with other criminal laws. There is a reason for this.
This is where you have to do some homework. Your state will have a law that allows exceptions to the drug law. In my state, the law allows possession without intent to deliver: (c) “The following persons … may possess controlled substances … (3) an ultimate user or …”
In 2003 too many people were being released from jail by using the ultimate user defense. So the legislature passed the new law supposedly to clarify the existing law — but used words to make it more confusing. It now allows ultimate user possession of controlled substance if by prescription “or except as otherwise authorized by this chapter.”
Lawyers will try to tell you that there is no constitutional right to defend your health and that the law changed in 2003 to eliminate the ultimate user defense. But the legislature stated clearly in the Act that the law revision “is not intended that this act effectuate any substantive change to any criminal provision…”
Apparently Congress was cautious enough to preserve your rights with this loophole. And judges, at least prior to 2003, also recognized your rights. The problem seems to be with law enforcement and prosecutors who do not obey the law.


Your state congress gives exclusive powers to the Pharmacy Board (or whatever it is called in your state) to enforce the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, which they implement by regulation. The police can assist them, but the law does not give police the authority to act as their agents.
Prior to judicial review of the Pharmacy Board cases, the court must review the record to see that administrative remedies were exhausted by the Pharmacy Board prior to judicial review as required by your state’s Administrative Procedures Act.


Your conclusion may be different, but it seems obvious to me that if you are a licensed pharmacist and while you are on duty, you possess an unregulated untaxed “counterfeit” of a taxed drug, then you are in trouble. The legislature presumes that you possess your unregulated, untaxed substance for a criminal purpose (to violate the truth in labeling consumer protection laws of regulated commerce, and fraudulently sell adulterated meds at the higher price), although you have a right to rebut this presumption.
They have a right to regulate you because you are licensed to be regulated. But you still have a right to exhaust your Administrative remedies prior to court.
The lesson to be learned by us non-pharmacists is not to snitch on your fellow slaves. America can once again become be a free country.


Yes, there are many harmful drugs that will destroy your life. Yes, there are many harmful addictive drugs that lead people to commit robbery and violence in order to satisfy their addiction. But that doesn’t make it constitutional to ban a God-given liberty. After all, even tobacco is addictive and costly. And sugar can destroy your life. And gambling addictions and greedy lifestyles can also lead to a life of crime. So why did we abandon our rights? Did we really give up our rights just because some people commit crimes?

Ben Franklin once wrote that

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin, November 11, 1755; Reply to the Governor. This is inscribed on a plaque in the stairwell of the Statute of Liberty.

By the way, Benjamin Franklin also wrote about liberty

“That it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.” – The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol 9 p 293.

Back when we had a constitutional government we tolerated opium dens, we popularized Coca-Cola that was made with Cocaine, and people still kept their rights.
The words “secure” and “security,” when used in the national Constitution, are only used in the context of protecting the people from their own government.
Who do you fear the most: Rodney King who was a speeding motorist accused of being high on drugs (even though no evidence of drugs was admitted in his trials), or the government processing of a speeding motorist who had harmed no one, or a jury who doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong.
Yes, many useful drugs have side effects that can destroy your life. Life will always be risky. Consider carefully, then choose wisely. But don’t whine to congress for someone else to make your decisions for you.
You might think that people complaining to congressmen about drug induced crimes was why drug laws evolved into unconstitutional violations of congressmen’s oaths of office. But there is another explanation.
America is a superpower because of the infusion into your economy of CIA drug money. What country would not fight — and fight fiercely — to get 600 Billion dollars in drug money into their economy?
The bad news is that the economy is propped up way too high and it is about to collapse. The further the fall the harder we will hit bottom. Even the Bible predicts the future fall of Babylon the Great. “for by thy pharmacy [original Greek word was pharmakeia] were all nations deceived” Revelation 18:23.
For you see, fractional reserve banking (which came to America in 1913, as soon as the Supreme Court decriminalized it) cannot survive without continually expanding capitalization. The CIA was established in 1947 to delay the inevitable collapse of this phony banking system. The CIA controls the drug traffic — and foreign oil — in order to prop up Wall Street by making cheap money available to Wall Street bankers. The Money Laundering Laws don’t apply to any company on the NY Stock Exchange. In order to keep drug profits high, the politicians outlaw their competition. Our prisons are filled with the sacrifices they made for their mammon.

History Topic #7: International law.

Even though self-medication is a God-given unalienable right, the country of Portugal is the only nation that has explicitly decriminalized all drugs. They dared not explicitly legalize drugs due to the international pressure from nations that want everyone to believe that drugs are evil.  It costs less to treat the addicted than to process them in a criminal justice system.
Poppy fields in Afghanistan were eliminated by the Taliban. The U.S. could not tolerate this elimination of opium from the controlled trafficking, so it declared war against the Taliban.
In order to make sense of it all, you must understand that the CIA was created in 1947 to delay the collapse of the corrupt central banking system. Drug money must be used to prop up the perpetually expanding money base. And now that the collapse is near, drugs profits must be maximized.

* because lawful government cannot exceed the authority delegated to it by the Constitution. Example: US Supreme Court in Julliard v. Greenman: 110 US 421: “there is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States. It is a government of delegated powers, supreme within its prescribed sphere, but powerless outside of it. In this country, sovereignty resides in the people, and congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their constitution, intrusted to it; all else is withheld.”


My other essays at

If you don’t know how to defend your rights, you will lose them.  If you do not know their rules and procedures in their courts, you will lose. For more information on how to defend your rights I recommend a self-help law course. Learn how to hold your civil servants to the rule of law WITHOUT a lawyer.  All the basic court procedures are explained in  “How To Win In Court” self-help course. Click for a tour of the “How To Win In Court” online law course.



Leave a Reply