It’s not really an argument about jury nullification per se, but a tired rehashing of how The Man doesn’t have the right to take away our precious, precious dope.
Commenter Oren summed up the entire argument nicely:The question is not the aims of the government, which are uncontroversial, but rather the authority to judge whether a provision is inside or outside that mandate. I personally judge that prohibition of possession of drugs is outside the mandate of the government. I think the war on drugs is the epitome of stupidity and I think Raich was wrongly decided. Nevertheless, I’m not a sore loser and I accept those laws and judgments. I am currently working towards a ballot initiative in my state that will express those view and I have consistently voted for candidates that agree with my position.
Those that want to start nullifying drug convictions left and right are simply unable to admit to themselves that they have lost the battle for public opinion but instead of attempting to convince others by reason, they want to impose their judgment on whatever defendant has the luck of the draw to fall into their judgment. More An-Cap bullsh*t about the individual’s right to determine constitutionality of existing laws they don’t like.
BTW, has Dale committed suicide in recompense for convicting the pants-sh*tting dope smuggler, as Richard Nikoley suggested? |
| |
Written By:
Jeff
URL:
http://
|
