420 Magazine Background

Jeff Sessions' Marijuana Adviser Wants Doctors To Drug-Test Everyone

Ron Strider

Well-Known Member
A adviser on marijuana policy to Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to see doctors make drug testing a routine part of primary-care medicine and force some users into treatment against their will, he told The Daily Beast.

Dr. Robert DuPont was among a small group of drug-policy experts invited to a closed-door meeting with Sessions last month to discuss federal options for dealing with the rapid liberalization of state marijuana laws. California became the sixth state to allow the sale of marijuana for recreational use on Jan. 1.

DuPont, 81, is one of the most influential drug warriors of the past century. He began his career as a liberal on drug control in the 1970s, calling then for the decriminalization of marijuana possession and launching the first U.S. methadone treatment program for heroin in Washington, D.C. in 1971. By the 1980s, he shifted to the right, popularizing the claim marijuana was a "gateway drug."

At the December 2017 meeting with Sessions, DuPont was slated to present on "the effect of marijuana on drugged driving," a topic on which he has proposed some radical ideas.

A national model bill he helped write in 2010 called on law enforcement to test anyone stopped for suspicion of driving under the influence for all controlled substances, and arresting them if any trace at all shows up in their system–regardless of the amount. While the bill includes an exemption for drivers who consumed a drug pursuant to a prescription, it would not apply to medicinal-marijuana users because doctors are not currently allowed to prescribe pot, only offer a recommendation for its use.

The bill's language makes clear that these people will still face sanction even if they live in a state in which medical marijuana is legal.

"[The] fact that any person charged with violating this subsection is or was legally entitled to consume alcohol or to use a controlled substance, medication, drug, or other impairing substance, shall not constitute a defense against any charge," it reads.

But even that's not the worst of it.

The bill includes a section prohibiting the "Internal Possession of Chemical or Controlled Substances."

"Any person who provides a bodily fluid sample containing any amount of a chemical or controlled substance... commits an offense punishable in the same manner as if the person otherwise possessed that substance," it reads, adding in a footnote: "This provision is not a DUI specific law. Rather, it applies to any person who tests positive for chemical or controlled substances."

Asked to comment on whether Sessions was aware of DuPont's proposal to penalize drug users who may not even be under the influence behind the wheel, and if he supports it, a Justice Department spokesperson chose to focus on the dangers of driving while intoxicated.

"The Controlled Substances Act was enacted by Congress to comprehensively restrict and regulate numerous drugs, including marijuana," said DOJ spokeswoman Lauren Ehrsam, in a statement provided to The Daily Beast. "Further, the attorney general agrees with the Centers for Disease Control that driving while impaired by marijuana is dangerous as it negatively affects a number of skills required for safe driving."

On closer inspection, DuPont's proposal is part of a plan to expand the use of drug-testing technology to root out users, and the threat of prosecution to compel them into treatment, where they will be tested even more.

Early last year, The Daily Beast conducted a lengthy interview with DuPont as he was shopping around a radical proposal –called the "New Paradigm for Long-Term Recovery"–to address America's festering overdose crisis. It would include a massive expansion of drug testing in addiction medicine.

"Drug testing is the technology of addiction medicine, but it's underutilized," he said. "We want [drug screens] to be routine in all medicine. The health-care sector in general should approach addiction in the same way as diabetes, and that includes monitoring. Doctors already check for things like cholesterol and blood sugar. Why not test for illicit drugs?"

Calling his platform "the opposite of harm reduction," DuPont said the goal of his plan is to promote "long-term results... and greater accountability" in the treatment sector.

Among other things, he proposed giving doctors the authority to compel suspected substance abusers into treatment against their will. Once in treatment, patients could face as much as five years of monitoring, including random drug tests.

"People don't understand that referral to treatment is futile for an addict on their own," DuPont told The Daily Beast. "Right now, the public really thinks that if we provide treatment the addicts will come and get well... that's not true. So let's use the leverage of the criminal-justice system, that's what the programs in the New Paradigm want to do."

Turning a Profit Off Drug Testing

DuPont presents his proposal as evidence-based, but it's hard to separate his strong promotion of drug testing from his close personal and financial connections to the drug testing industry.

In the 1970s he was the nation's drug czar under Nixon and Ford, and was the first Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, until his increasingly radical views (he called for drug testing all parolees and sending them back to prison if they failed) forced his resignation in 1978.

After leaving federal service, DuPont joined the former head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Pete Bensinger, to cash in on urine testing. The firm they founded, Bensinger, DuPont & Associates, provided drug testing services to some of America's largest corporations.

"Doctors already check for things like cholesterol and blood sugar, why not test for illicit drugs."

– Dr. Robert DuPont​
In 1991, while running the firm, DuPont introduced the idea of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients in a policy document published by the Heritage Foundation. DuPont recommended "not only testing the adults on public assistance but also their children."

Later that decade, DuPont co-authored research with the founder of a firm called Psychemedics promoting the company's new hair testing technology.

In 2000, while he was a shareholder and a paid consultant for the company DuPont testified before a Food & Drug Administration panel on drug testing where he advocated for expanding hair testing into federal workplaces. Dismissing the appearance of a "conflict of interest" DuPont told the panel: "I don't think of myself as an employee or an advocate particularly for Psychemedics, but for drug testing generally."

The FDA approved the company's first hair follicle test two years later, and today Psychemedics is a multi-million dollar a year business that's in the process of a profitable expansion into South America.

This is a running theme for DuPont. For instance, Stephen Talpins, an attorney who helped DuPont author his model drugged driving bill, formerly was a vice president at Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc., which makes the SCRAM alcohol and location monitoring system used by many courts.

Now DuPont is listed as a scientific adviser on the website of global drug-testing startup called CAM International Ventures. That company was founded in 2013 by David Martin, former president of the Drug & Alcohol Testing Industry Association, and includes among its staff other prominent members of the drug testing industry.

Still, DuPont rejects the idea that there is any financial motivation behind his fixation drug testing.

"I find it bizarre to think that my interests after all these years were financial," he told The Daily Beast. "I just think, there is a financial incentive in drug testing, but the reason I'm interested in drug testing is that there is an interest from the disease standpoint."

With a dozen more states expected to consider legal marijuana measures in 2018, and even Republican lawmakers like Trey Gowdy questioning the federal government's hard stance on the drug, it's unlikely even a die hard anti-pot crusader like DuPont can turn back the tide, but that doesn't mean he can't make a few more bucks trying.



News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Jeff Sessions' Marijuana Adviser Wants Doctors to Drug-Test Everyone
Author: Christopher Moraff
Contact: The Daily Beast
Photo Credit: Sarah Rogers
Website: The Daily Beast
 

whiteraven86

New Member
If you look closely at just about every attack against cannabis; these attacks are based on money. This so called doctor wants massive testing because his association with testing will make him money.
........
Why is cannabis still in Schedule I?
One reason is the pharmaceutical industry. A study, which appears in Health Affairs found that states that legalized medical marijuana — which is sometimes recommended for symptoms like chronic pain, anxiety, or depression — saw declines of over 20% in the number of Medicare prescriptions for drugs used to treat those conditions and a dip in spending by Medicare Part D, which covers the cost of prescription medications. Decreased demand for these types of prescriptions is one cause why pharmaceutical companies lobby aggressively and pour millions into political campaigns for cannabis to remain illegal. Pfizer, one of the most influential and largest pharmaceutical companies, spent more than $10 million in lobbying efforts and contributions in 2014 according to CNN and “the CheatSheet”.
Read: “As Medicinal Cannabis Heals More People, Federal Government Increases Restrictions to Stop It”
It should also be noted that prescription pain medicine deaths have dropped 25% in states that allow medical cannabis. This study by co-author Colleen Barry, a health policy researcher at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. “The shift showed up quite quickly and became visible the year after medical marijuana was accepted in each state, she told Newsweek.”
With the egregious effects of prescription opioid dependence and deaths, this report by itself should be a legitimate reason to take cannabis completely out of the drug schedules.
Even industrial hemp was outlawed. The cotton industry and all its peripheral industries such as herbicide and pesticide producers, and cotton equipment processing machinery companies are threatened by the prospect of industrial hemp cutting into their profits.
The beer, wine, and liquor industries lobby against it being removed from Schedule I because Some states that have legalized the recreational use of cannabis have seen alcohol sales drop over fifteen percent according to a working paper by researchers at the University of Connecticut and Georgia State University . A 15% drop in sales is a very strong incentive for alcohol related industries to strongly oppose any type of legalized cannabis use.
Many in the criminal Justice system lobby to keep it in Schedule I. Law enforcement uses asset forfeiture egregiously in many cases pointing to Cannabis being in Schedule I as justification. If law enforcement has a financial benefit due to asset forfeiture, how can anyone claim that enforcement is blindfolded like Lady Justice? Asset forfeiture does not require a conviction or even those charges be filed. Montana and New Mexico recently required that there must be a conviction before assets can be seized, at least at the state level.
Some, including myself, believe that asset forfeiture in these cases is a clear violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments
Justice Clarence Thomas from offering an opinion on the matter. see: “Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Asset Forfeiture: "This System has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses!"
“This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses,” wrote Thomas. “I am skeptical that this historical practice is capable of sustaining, as a constitutional matter, the contours of modern practice.”
From the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General:
“We found that the Department and its investigative component do not use aggregate data to evaluate fully and oversee their seizure operations … We do not doubt the financial and deterrent effect seizures can have on criminal organizations and that intelligence collected during seizure operations can assist investigations. However, without evaluating data more systematically, it is impossible for the Department to determine (1) whether seizures benefit law enforcement efforts, such as advancing criminal investigations and deterring future criminal activity, or (2) the extent to which seizures may present risks to civil liberties.”
Of 100 cash seizure by the DEA examined by the Inspector General, including 85 that occurred as a result of interdiction operations at transportation hubs The IG reported:
“[The Drug Enforcement Administration] could verify that only 44 of the 100 seizures, and only 29 of the 85 interdiction seizures, had (1) advanced or been related to ongoing investigation, (2) resulted in the initiation of new investigations, (3) led to arrests, or (4) led to prosecutions. When seizures and administrative forfeitures do not ultimately advance an investigation or prosecution, law enforcement creates the appearance, and risks the reality, that it is more interested in seizing and forfeiting cash than advancing an investigation or prosecution.”


Former DEA Spokeswoman: Marijuana is Safe and The DEA Knows It:
Quotes from Belita Nelson, former DEA spokesperson, who was formerly a chief spoke person for the DEA:
“Marijuana is safe, we know it is safe. It’s our cash cow and we will never give up,” Belita Nelson told an audience of doctors and nurses at the Marijuana for Medical Professionals Conference in Denver, Colorado a short time ago.
Nelson says that was the first thing she learned from her Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) education coordinator, Paul Villaescusa, when she was hired in the Dallas office in April 1998.
She states that the DEA made the mistake of not having her sign a non-disclosure contract when she was hired.
Nelson states that when she began to expose the truth the DEA tried to keep her quiet and told her. “name your price, $10,000 a month? $20,000? What do you want Belita?”
“Gradually, I came out of my shell and that dark place I had been because of what I had experienced and what I had seen… If you think the DEA are the good guys, they are not. They are really not. We are talking corruption on steroids.”
Read more at #illegallyhealed
If Belita Nelson is correct, I believe an in-depth investigation of the DEA and its policies concerning cannabis is in order.
 

Nightmask

Well-Known Member
Ho-ly shit. What the actual fuck. The psychopaths in power aren't even trying to hide their corrupt power mad control fuckery anymore.
(if this introduction wasn't enough of an indication there is much colourful language in this post so please don't read if you're easily offended, but honestly the original article should be way more offensive than a few swear words)

A adviser on marijuana policy to Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to see doctors make drug testing a routine part of primary-care medicine and force some users into treatment against their will
Say what now? Force people into treatment against their will? Holy shit. Are you serious? I guess a little something called free will doesn't mean anything to these power mad control freaks.

Dr. Robert DuPont was among a small group of drug-policy experts invited to a closed-door meeting with Sessions last month
DuPont and others are drug policy experts, meaning they aren't experts with regards to drugs themselves (he clearly knows fuck all about cannabis), they are experts at drug policy, and policy = law = control. It's all about control (and power and profit).

By the 1980s, he shifted to the right, popularizing the claim marijuana was a "gateway drug."
DuPont claims marijuana is a "gateway drug"? Okay, where's the proof? Where's the evidence? Where are all the studies to back up his claim? There aren't any, partly because its been illegal at the federal level for decades so it couldn't be studied. They can't claim there are no positive benefits to weed cause there are no studies showing its benefits because it's illegal to study while at the same time claim they got evidence showing it's a "gateway drug". You can't just make shit up and talk shit and write laws that will affect everyone else based on made up shit. Oh wait, that's pretty much what those in government do all the time, but instead of calling out the bullshit and corruption and tossing these scumbags out of office so much of the public seems to just accept it.

A national model bill he helped write in 2010 called on law enforcement to test anyone stopped for suspicion of driving under the influence for all controlled substances, and arresting them if any trace at all shows up in their system–regardless of the amount.
Mere suspicion is enough? That 'suspicion' thing is total bullshit by the way, it's an excuse that can be used on anyone for anything. Man walking his pug? Suspicious. Old lady knitting? Suspicious. 3 year old toddler? That one's got 'suspicious' written all over him, and look at how he walks, he's clearly on something so lets arrest the suspicious little bastard and if any parents get upset that we kidnapped a child at gunpoint and put our hands down his diaper we can just say he looked suspicious and we had reason to believe he was a Mexican drug mule and carrying 13kg of high grade heroin in his diaper, sorry if our information wasn't accurate and fuck you because we have total immunity for our actions so good luck suing us since the 'justice' system is also rigged to fuck you over. And notice how the bill only targets controlled substances, even though large numbers of pharmaceutical drugs (which just so happen to be legal and very lucrative for the Big Harma drug cartel) can have some seriously dangerous adverse effects, like you know, those warnings of "Do not operate heavy machinery" (a car is heavy machinery), or the black box warnings on some psychiatric drugs like SSRI's that warn people right on the box that those drugs may increase homicidal and/or suicidal thoughts and actions (someone driving a vehicle and having homicidal and/or suicidal thoughts and not in their right mind because of psychiatric drugs sounds pretty dangerous to me, but those won't be tested for of course). Don't bother testing for legal drugs that have proven potentially deadly effects and kill over 100,000 people every year cause they're legal and make Big Harma rich who bribe the politicians who pass the laws, instead you should totally put all your focus on a substance that has never killed anyone. That totally makes sense. Actually it does totally make sense when you look at it from the point of view of corrupt power mad control freaks.

The bill's language makes clear that these people will still face sanction even if they live in a state in which medical marijuana is legal.
Yep, who cares what the people want, and who cares if a State has listened to the people and legalized it, the Federal Government is the Daddy and we have to do what Daddy says cause who gives a shit about everyone else, all that matters is that a very few asshats feel important and powerful and have the 'right' to strip everyone else of their rights.

"[The] fact that any person charged with violating this subsection is or was legally entitled to consume alcohol or to use a controlled substance, medication, drug, or other impairing substance, shall not constitute a defense against any charge," it reads.
Even if you legally gain 'permission' from a control freak to use a substance (yep that's right, you need to ask the governments permission to put certain substances into your own body) these bigger control freaks don't care even if it's legal cause the words they wrote on their piece of paper saying you are not legally allowed to consume a substance are bigger and meaner and will beat up the words on the other piece of paper saying you can legally consume a substance.

The bill includes a section prohibiting the "Internal Possession of Chemical or Controlled Substances."
"Any person who provides a bodily fluid sample containing any amount of a chemical or controlled substance... commits an offense punishable in the same manner as if the person otherwise possessed that substance," it reads
Provides a bodily fluid sample? I don't think many people would willing give that up so I'm pretty sure this providing of a bodily fluid sample will be at gun point, tazer point, or under threat of a beating or getting thrown in jail. Seriously, if these psychopathic power mad control freaks want to test your bodily fluids for a chemical or controlled substance so badly whip your junk out and piss on them. Actually maybe don't, these nutcases might try to taze your bits (hrmm electricity travels through water so they might end up tazing themselves in the process, and if both of you end up writhing around in your pee from tazer induced spasms it's fine for you because it's your pee but it will be totally disgusting for them).
As for 'committing an offense' if you have any controlled substance in your bodily system these dickheads might want to look up a fancy little chemical called Dimethyltryptamine (DMT) which is classified as a schedule one drug by the American Federal Government and it is naturally produced in our bodies. So basically every single person on the planet not only has a chemical or controlled schedule one drug in their system but we are all technically drug manufacturers since our own bodies make the stuff naturally. Are they going to force under threat of imprisonment the entire human race into treatment for their use and manufacturing of DMT? Seriously these nutbags are so disconnected from reality and so desperately want to force their insane views onto everyone else that I wouldn't be surprised if they tried it.

On closer inspection, DuPont's proposal is part of a plan to expand the use of drug-testing technology to root out users, and the threat of prosecution to compel them into treatment, where they will be tested even more.
Just because you have the means of drug-testing people to find out who consumes what drugs doesn't mean you have the right to force that on an entire population against their will to find out who consumes what substances and to then force 'treatment' on them against their will and under threat of prosecution. I would say I'm lost for words but that's clearly not the case. And many people use cannabis as their treatment and medicine for any number of different issues, so what, you use your own free will to choose a treatment for your issues but the government doesn't give a flying fuck about your free will and wants to force a different treatment on you because they don't like the treatment you chose for yourself? What the fucking fuck? These people are lunatics, but they are lunatics in positions of power who want to force their insanity on millions of people.

"Drug testing is the technology of addiction medicine, but it's underutilized," he said. "We want [drug screens] to be routine in all medicine. The health-care sector in general should approach addiction in the same way as diabetes, and that includes monitoring. Doctors already check for things like cholesterol and blood sugar. Why not test for illicit drugs?"
They want to push mandatory drug screens? Again they wouldn't test for legal drugs no matter how much evidence there is of the potential harms because they are legal and profitable for the pharmaceutical cartel and not a 'controlled substance'. And here he's talking about drug screens and addiction and basically saying that they should forcibly test for controlled substances and if any substance in any amount is found then that person is absolutely an addict and should be forced into 'treatment'. Having a small amount of a substance in your system does not make you an addict nor does it mean you need treatment. Will they forcibly test for alcohol or cigarettes and force people into treatment for those? No? Of course not. And to answer DuPont's question of "Why not test for illicit drugs?" because it's none of your fucking business what I do in the privacy of my own home or put into my own body that's why.

Among other things, he proposed giving doctors the authority to compel suspected substance abusers into treatment against their will. Once in treatment, patients could face as much as five years of monitoring, including random drug tests.
What the hell? Five years of being watched over and forcibly 'treated' by a government enforcement thug because you dared put something into your own body as a consenting adult that the power mad control freaks says you are not allowed to touch. That sounds totally fair and not a gross abusive of power at all. And doctors are supposed to be there to help people, they are not supposed to be thugs in a white coat who can force you against your will to not only provide a sample of whatever for testing but also force you in to a treatment you may not want and monitor you for five years. Is chemotherapy forced on people under the threat of imprisonment? No? Because there's a little thing called informed consent and free will (which DuPont clearly thinks his free will supersedes everyone elses free will, cause he's way more specialer than all you dirty peasants) which means we have the right to tell a doctor to go fuck themselves if we don't like what they tell us.

"People don't understand that referral to treatment is futile for an addict on their own," DuPont told The Daily Beast. "Right now, the public really thinks that if we provide treatment the addicts will come and get well... that's not true. So let's use the leverage of the criminal-justice system, that's what the programs in the New Paradigm want to do."
DuPont wants to force drug testing on people and he seems to think that any amount of a controlled substance found in someones body means they are an addict and need to be forced into treatment, forced at gunpoint and with the treat of jail using the criminal-justice system. Cause you know, being forced to piss in a cup, forced to take a treatment you may not like or want or is even effective, and be heavily monitored by government thugs for five years, who cares about all the time and (taxpayer!) money and resources that would be a huge waste of, atleast we could stop all those nasty addicts taking a bong hit in the privacy of their own home. And note that it would be concerning illegal and controlled substances, so you can overdose the fuck out every damn day on any legal drug you want, wooo.


DuPont presents his proposal as evidence-based, but it's hard to separate his strong promotion of drug testing from his close personal and financial connections to the drug testing industry.
His proposal is evidence-based? Okay, provide the evidence. All of it. If it's such rock solid evidence then it would hold up to being scrutinized. But of course he won't provide any actual evidence because these nutbags don't care about science or facts all they care about is forcing their own agenda on everyone else, science and facts be damned. And as for his "close personal and financial connections to the drug testing industry" well that's just open corruption.

In 1991, while running the firm, DuPont introduced the idea of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients in a policy document published by the Heritage Foundation. DuPont recommended "not only testing the adults on public assistance but also their children."
Mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients has been pushed in numerous places and it's always been a huge waste of time and (taxpayer) money and doesn't do anything to reduce or prevent drug use. As for DuPont recommending drug testing not only adults but also their children, again, holy fucking shit. This guy thinks he has the right and the power to not only forcibly test, treat, and monitor adults substance use against their will, he also thinks he has the right and the power to bypass the will of the fucking parent who's child it is (but then again maybe it's the governments child because everyone should have figured out by now how badly the government fucks us on a daily basis) and also forcibly test, treat, and monitor children not only against the child's free will but also the free will of the parent. Cause you know, some government psychopathic control freak should totally have the right and the power to do whatever the fuck they want not only to you but also to your child, cause fuck you and your childs human rights, the governments right to abuse your rights trumps your right to human rights, alright?

Still, DuPont rejects the idea that there is any financial motivation behind his fixation drug testing.
"I find it bizarre to think that my interests after all these years were financial," he told The Daily Beast. "I just think, there is a financial incentive in drug testing, but the reason I'm interested in drug testing is that there is an interest from the disease standpoint."
Oh look, he rejects the idea he has any financial conflict of interest regarding drug testing. Well it's great he cleared that up, now that he's rejected that idea we can all rest assured that there's totally no financial motivation for him. Hrmm, if that's the case and he rejects the idea I wonder if he'd give up every single dollar he might have personally profited from and give it to charity. Doubt it. And as for him not being interested in the money and being interested in the disease standpoint, niiiagra please, we're supposed to believe he's motivated by wanting to learn about a disease and not money? *cough* bullshit *cough*

With a dozen more states expected to consider legal marijuana measures in 2018, and even Republican lawmakers like Trey Gowdy questioning the federal government's hard stance on the drug, it's unlikely even a die hard anti-pot crusader like DuPont can turn back the tide, but that doesn't mean he can't make a few more bucks trying.
I really hope that rabid anti (illegal) drug mutts like DuPont are ignored, but when people like him with clearly unhinged views that are not based on facts, science, or reality have a direct connection to the government or are in government (like Jeff Sessions) this should be a cause for concern for everyone, regardless of if you consume any illegal substances or not.


We should not let a very few rich and powerful corrupt assholes force their clearly unhinged toxic and abusive views on to everyone else. This shit is like an abusive father that emotionally and physically abuses you on a daily basis based on total bullshit they completely made up to justify their abuse then makes you feel guilty because you 'made them do it'. These psychopathic power mad control freaks do not give a shit about human rights or freedoms, all they care about is the status quo of power, profit, and control.
 
Last edited:

WyldeChylde

New Member
Imho, this entire article is much adeau about nothing. On the face of things most of the policies this guy wants to implement are inherently unconstitutional on multiple levels. Good luck getting anything even remotely resembling anything like this through Congress. And if it somehow manages to do that? Good luck surviving all the SC challenges.

The good news is the guy is 81. He's going in the ground soon. I believe this to be a good thing.

The real public enemy No. 1 is Kevin Sabet. People like this want to keep their boots on your throat and dictate to you how you will live. Last I checked Sharia law was incompatible with western ideology. This is the real rat in the basement.
 

WyldeChylde

New Member
As far as Sessions rescinding the Cole memo. It really doesn't matter. He doesn't have the resources to put this cat back in the bag.
 

SashaShiva

Active Member
Everyone is mad that Jeff Sessions is making Dispensaries Illegal, but honestly, I think Recreational Marijuana was making Religious and Medical Marijuana look bad.

It was getting to the point where on Marijuana shows, people were embarrassed to Mention if they were an actual Patient, who needed Marijuana, because it's not cool to talk about your back pain or whatever. And it is really just getting kind of to be a Recreation, which is the definition of Ab-Use, there are Uses and Ab-Uses. And Ab-Uses can not exist without Uses, so to say something is Ab-Used, is to say that there is a Use for it.
 

spintowin

New Member
He orders this just days after the state of California goes recreational? There's a lot of money to be made in the cannabis industry. I thought things like this need to go through Congress, am I right? I'm confused.....
 

MackMcMacMac

Photo of the Month: June 2018
He orders this just days after the state of California goes recreational? There's a lot of money to be made in the cannabis industry. I thought things like this need to go through Congress, am I right? I'm confused.....
Congress makes laws, and the justice department enforces them. If Congress votes to remove cannabis from the list of illegal drugs, then Sessions wouldn't be able to do anything about it. He'd have nothing to enforce wrt cannabis.
 

WyldeChylde

New Member
This is all going to come to a head with a showdown between Congress and the DOJ. If the flood gates break open and Congress prevails in ending federal prohibition that will be the time to mount pressure with demands for either exceptions to IRS Tax Code 280E or it's outright repeal. Access to all standard business deductions as allowed for under the US Tax Code. Access to financial institutions and tools without fear of reprisal or "gouging". And, most importantly an end to 2nd amendment restrictions for law abiding Americans.
 

MackMcMacMac

Photo of the Month: June 2018
Google Cory Booker's cannabis bill - common sense reform to get this life saving plant off the schedule 1. To those in the US, I recommend you write to/call your legislators and urge them to support the bill.
 

McSwagDaddy

New Member
Ho-ly shit. What the actual fuck. The psychopaths in power aren't even trying to hide their corrupt power mad control fuckery anymore.
(if this introduction wasn't enough of an indication there is much colourful language in this post so please don't read if you're easily offended, but honestly the original article should be way more offensive than a few swear words)


Say what now? Force people into treatment against their will? Holy shit. Are you serious? I guess a little something called free will doesn't mean anything to these power mad control freaks.


DuPont and others are drug policy experts, meaning they aren't experts with regards to drugs themselves (he clearly knows fuck all about cannabis), they are experts at drug policy, and policy = law = control. It's all about control (and power and profit).


DuPont claims marijuana is a "gateway drug"? Okay, where's the proof? Where's the evidence? Where are all the studies to back up his claim? There aren't any, partly because its been illegal at the federal level for decades so it couldn't be studied. They can't claim there are no positive benefits to weed cause there are no studies showing its benefits because it's illegal to study while at the same time claim they got evidence showing it's a "gateway drug". You can't just make shit up and talk shit and write laws that will affect everyone else based on made up shit. Oh wait, that's pretty much what those in government do all the time, but instead of calling out the bullshit and corruption and tossing these scumbags out of office so much of the public seems to just accept it.


Mere suspicion is enough? That 'suspicion' thing is total bullshit by the way, it's an excuse that can be used on anyone for anything. Man walking his pug? Suspicious. Old lady knitting? Suspicious. 3 year old toddler? That one's got 'suspicious' written all over him, and look at how he walks, he's clearly on something so lets arrest the suspicious little bastard and if any parents get upset that we kidnapped a child at gunpoint and put our hands down his diaper we can just say he looked suspicious and we had reason to believe he was a Mexican drug mule and carrying 13kg of high grade heroin in his diaper, sorry if our information wasn't accurate and fuck you because we have total immunity for our actions so good luck suing us since the 'justice' system is also rigged to fuck you over. And notice how the bill only targets controlled substances, even though large numbers of pharmaceutical drugs (which just so happen to be legal and very lucrative for the Big Harma drug cartel) can have some seriously dangerous adverse effects, like you know, those warnings of "Do not operate heavy machinery" (a car is heavy machinery), or the black box warnings on some psychiatric drugs like SSRI's that warn people right on the box that those drugs may increase homicidal and/or suicidal thoughts and actions (someone driving a vehicle and having homicidal and/or suicidal thoughts and not in their right mind because of psychiatric drugs sounds pretty dangerous to me, but those won't be tested for of course). Don't bother testing for legal drugs that have proven potentially deadly effects and kill over 100,000 people every year cause they're legal and make Big Harma rich who bribe the politicians who pass the laws, instead you should totally put all your focus on a substance that has never killed anyone. That totally makes sense. Actually it does totally make sense when you look at it from the point of view of corrupt power mad control freaks.


Yep, who cares what the people want, and who cares if a State has listened to the people and legalized it, the Federal Government is the Daddy and we have to do what Daddy says cause who gives a shit about everyone else, all that matters is that a very few asshats feel important and powerful and have the 'right' to strip everyone else of their rights.


Even if you legally gain 'permission' from a control freak to use a substance (yep that's right, you need to ask the governments permission to put certain substances into your own body) these bigger control freaks don't care even if it's legal cause the words they wrote on their piece of paper saying you are not legally allowed to consume a substance are bigger and meaner and will beat up the words on the other piece of paper saying you can legally consume a substance.


Provides a bodily fluid sample? I don't think many people would willing give that up so I'm pretty sure this providing of a bodily fluid sample will be at gun point, tazer point, or under threat of a beating or getting thrown in jail. Seriously, if these psychopathic power mad control freaks want to test your bodily fluids for a chemical or controlled substance so badly whip your junk out and piss on them. Actually maybe don't, these nutcases might try to taze your bits (hrmm electricity travels through water so they might end up tazing themselves in the process, and if both of you end up writhing around in your pee from tazer induced spasms it's fine for you because it's your pee but it will be totally disgusting for them).
As for 'committing an offense' if you have any controlled substance in your bodily system these dickheads might want to look up a fancy little chemical called Dimethyltryptamine (DMT) which is classified as a schedule one drug by the American Federal Government and it is naturally produced in our bodies. So basically every single person on the planet not only has a chemical or controlled schedule one drug in their system but we are all technically drug manufacturers since our own bodies make the stuff naturally. Are they going to force under threat of imprisonment the entire human race into treatment for their use and manufacturing of DMT? Seriously these nutbags are so disconnected from reality and so desperately want to force their insane views onto everyone else that I wouldn't be surprised if they tried it.


Just because you have the means of drug-testing people to find out who consumes what drugs doesn't mean you have the right to force that on an entire population against their will to find out who consumes what substances and to then force 'treatment' on them against their will and under threat of prosecution. I would say I'm lost for words but that's clearly not the case. And many people use cannabis as their treatment and medicine for any number of different issues, so what, you use your own free will to choose a treatment for your issues but the government doesn't give a flying fuck about your free will and wants to force a different treatment on you because they don't like the treatment you chose for yourself? What the fucking fuck? These people are lunatics, but they are lunatics in positions of power who want to force their insanity on millions of people.


They want to push mandatory drug screens? Again they wouldn't test for legal drugs no matter how much evidence there is of the potential harms because they are legal and profitable for the pharmaceutical cartel and not a 'controlled substance'. And here he's talking about drug screens and addiction and basically saying that they should forcibly test for controlled substances and if any substance in any amount is found then that person is absolutely an addict and should be forced into 'treatment'. Having a small amount of a substance in your system does not make you an addict nor does it mean you need treatment. Will they forcibly test for alcohol or cigarettes and force people into treatment for those? No? Of course not. And to answer DuPont's question of "Why not test for illicit drugs?" because it's none of your fucking business what I do in the privacy of my own home or put into my own body that's why.


What the hell? Five years of being watched over and forcibly 'treated' by a government enforcement thug because you dared put something into your own body as a consenting adult that the power mad control freaks says you are not allowed to touch. That sounds totally fair and not a gross abusive of power at all. And doctors are supposed to be there to help people, they are not supposed to be thugs in a white coat who can force you against your will to not only provide a sample of whatever for testing but also force you in to a treatment you may not want and monitor you for five years. Is chemotherapy forced on people under the threat of imprisonment? No? Because there's a little thing called informed consent and free will (which DuPont clearly thinks his free will supersedes everyone elses free will, cause he's way more specialer than all you dirty peasants) which means we have the right to tell a doctor to go fuck themselves if we don't like what they tell us.


DuPont wants to force drug testing on people and he seems to think that any amount of a controlled substance found in someones body means they are an addict and need to be forced into treatment, forced at gunpoint and with the treat of jail using the criminal-justice system. Cause you know, being forced to piss in a cup, forced to take a treatment you may not like or want or is even effective, and be heavily monitored by government thugs for five years, who cares about all the time and (taxpayer!) money and resources that would be a huge waste of, atleast we could stop all those nasty addicts taking a bong hit in the privacy of their own home. And note that it would be concerning illegal and controlled substances, so you can overdose the fuck out every damn day on any legal drug you want, wooo.



His proposal is evidence-based? Okay, provide the evidence. All of it. If it's such rock solid evidence then it would hold up to being scrutinized. But of course he won't provide any actual evidence because these nutbags don't care about science or facts all they care about is forcing their own agenda on everyone else, science and facts be damned. And as for his "close personal and financial connections to the drug testing industry" well that's just open corruption.


Mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients has been pushed in numerous places and it's always been a huge waste of time and (taxpayer) money and doesn't do anything to reduce or prevent drug use. As for DuPont recommending drug testing not only adults but also their children, again, holy fucking shit. This guy thinks he has the right and the power to not only forcibly test, treat, and monitor adults substance use against their will, he also thinks he has the right and the power to bypass the will of the fucking parent who's child it is (but then again maybe it's the governments child because everyone should have figured out by now how badly the government fucks us on a daily basis) and also forcibly test, treat, and monitor children not only against the child's free will but also the free will of the parent. Cause you know, some government psychopathic control freak should totally have the right and the power to do whatever the fuck they want not only to you but also to your child, cause fuck you and your childs human rights, the governments right to abuse your rights trumps your right to human rights, alright?


Oh look, he rejects the idea he has any financial conflict of interest regarding drug testing. Well it's great he cleared that up, now that he's rejected that idea we can all rest assured that there's totally no financial motivation for him. Hrmm, if that's the case and he rejects the idea I wonder if he'd give up every single dollar he might have personally profited from and give it to charity. Doubt it. And as for him not being interested in the money and being interested in the disease standpoint, niiiagra please, we're supposed to believe he's motivated by wanting to learn about a disease and not money? *cough* bullshit *cough*


I really hope that rabid anti (illegal) drug mutts like DuPont are ignored, but when people like him with clearly unhinged views that are not based on facts, science, or reality have a direct connection to the government or are in government (like Jeff Sessions) this should be a cause for concern for everyone, regardless of if you consume any illegal substances or not.


We should not let a very few rich and powerful corrupt assholes force their clearly unhinged toxic and abusive views on to everyone else. This shit is like an abusive father that emotionally and physically abuses you on a daily basis based on total bullshit they completely made up to justify their abuse then makes you feel guilty because you 'made them do it'. These psychopathic power mad control freaks do not give a shit about human rights or freedoms, all they care about is the status quo of power, profit, and control.
I really appreciated and enjoyed reading your passionate, yet somehow not widely articulated, thoughts. You're the reason this shit hasn't completely driven me crazy, however close, so thank you.
 

EasyNJ

New Member
You just want to puke when you read this stuff. Can supposedly intelligent people be that ignorant, the answer YES. However, as one of the previous replies noted, it's all about money in this case!
 
Top Bottom