Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gersh Avery who wrote (6141)	8/13/2007 3:25:24 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13062

In this case I think BOTH the law and the decision where bad. The decision was the one I alluded to in my previous post where I said - "The FDA has argued (and courts have accepted) that even drugs that are produced, distributed, sold, and use within the same state still amount to interstate commerce" - only to follow up with - "That argument is bogus IMO." Maybe I should have changed the FDA to the DEA, or the AG's office, but I'm sure the FDA would, and maybe has, made the same type of argument. I probably wouldn't say either the decision or the law where put in place "to protect some very remote chance that her staying alive could impact interstate commerce", because that wasn't really the purpose of either, but even if I'm coming at this from a slightly different angle than you are, I pretty much agree with you.