Writes Greg Privette:

Hi Lew,

Hope the new year is off to a good start for everyone at LRC and the Mises Institute.

I read the above mentioned article from Jacob Hornberger. In it he mentions the following: “My research did reveal that Rubis was convicted in Houston of distribution of marijuana rather than possession”.

I think it is important to remember this doesn’t always even mean the person was caught in the act of distributing. People are often charged with “possession with  intent to distribute”. This is another case of being charged with intent to do something even though a persons intent is nearly impossible to determine. Because of this they set very arbitrary levels to the law. So maybe an ounce of weed is possession, but two ounces indicates “intent” to distribute. In these cases someone can wind up with a much harsher sentence based entirely on the fact they possessed an arbitrarily set amount. I have often tried to explain to people that when the government has to set arbitrary measurements to determine the legality, or in this case the level of illegality, it is a sure sign the entire law is arbitrary. These arbitrary levels are also only necessary because of trying to make vices into crimes.