Perpetual Newbie voted 1 on this story.
I'm against drugs, but this law sounds like it would be highly unconstitutional.
Let's see what we've got...
`(g) In this section, the term `directly or indirectly advertise for sale' includes the use of any communication facility (as that term is defined in section 403(b)) to initiate the posting, publicizing, transmitting, publishing, linking to, broadcasting, or other advertising of any matter (including a telephone number or electronic or mail address) knowing that such matter has the purpose of seeking or offering, or is designed to be used, to receive, buy, distribute, or otherwise facilitate a transaction in.'.
Think about this. Can you put up a webpage advertising anything else illegal such as burglary services, assassin for hire, etc? Well, yes you can. You would be what we'd call an idiot, because if your page is serious it counts as probable cause. But that doesn't change the fact that people have the right to freely admit their criminality.
by inserting `amphetamine or' before `methamphetamine' each place it appears;
I wish someone would use the Web and link all these bills together whenever they refer to each other.. I don't know what the bill where these words are changed says, but to my knowledge amphetamines are legally prescribed drugs, so I hope they didn't just make a couple doctors' jobs illegal. They do a lot of this sort of thing in this and most bills, I'm too lazy to look up the other ones.
SEC. 5. CRIMINAL PROHIBITION ON DISTRIBUTION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION
RELATING TO THE MANUFACTURE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.
This entire section is unlawful under the Constitution. This requires getting rid of a lot of library and school text books. The "knowing that such person" will be used on the website owners to say that they know that at least one out of all the X people visiting your site is going to use the knowledge for illegal purposes. It is common knowledge that highschoolers use the anti-drug paraphernalia to find out what dope can get them the most high, so the same thing would logically have to apply.
Other ideas if the bill make some sense, apportioning money to PDs to fight meth, making meth labs clean up after the environmental wrecks they leave behind(I would think they would already be liable), research grants to find out how bad it really is so they don't have to FUD. Ah, but what's this?
`SEC. 423 (a) It is unlawful for any person--
`(1) to steal anhydrous ammonia, or
`(2) to transport stolen anhydrous ammonia across State lines,
Yeah, what with the lack of laws against stealing stuff right now. After we get done with anhydrous ammonia we'll have to declare the stealing of aniline dye to be illegal, and then we've got to write a law against stealing animals, and then anime, and... Well, that last one can wait a little while longer.
`(A) to carry out school-based programs concerning the dangers of abuse of and addiction to methamphetamine and other illicit drugs, using methods that are effective and science-based,
*mufflemubmblemublmblebm*sexual harassment panda!
including initiatives that give students the responsibility to create their own anti-drug abuse education programs for their schools;
Student-run drug programs? "Dude, like we did that Mexico shit, and it's like totally lame, but the Humboldt shit was sweet and all, y'know.."
A) if the offense created a substantial risk of harm to human life (other than a life described in subparagraph (B))
Legalese. Don'tcha just love it? *sigh* You see stuff like this, and you don't argue why Clinton had to ask what the definition of is is.
It's interesting to see that the ACLU is completely fucking clueless. They think the way to convince a congressman of their argument is to spam them with the exact same message over and over and over again. Y'know, there's something to be said for presentation of an argument.