Richard Davis' "Constitutional Challenge," against the State of Arizona and the Federal Government for the Right to possess as property, plant, grow, harvest, sell and consume (as food, medicine, sacrament and recreationally), Cannabis Sativa and its seed and all Extracts thereof.



Page 3

The defendant seeks the most fundamental protection, and all the protections against Cannabis Prohibition allowed by the Laws of the Land and the Laws of the State of Arizona. The defendant realizes that as an individual citizen of the United States and the World that all the freedoms and rights he seeks belong to all citizens of the world, citizens of these United States and the citizens of the great  state of Arizona. The defendant seeks these rights and freedoms for the farmers who cannot plant the worlds most important agricultural crop due to Cannabis Prohibition. The defendant seeks these rights and freedoms for those patients who have chosen to use Cannabis for medicine, and are made into criminals by Cannabis Prohibition.The defendant seeks these rights and freedoms for those incarcerated  by the very laws of Cannabis Prohibition, so they may be set free by the court. The defendant seeks these rights and freedoms for future generations who will come to rely on Cannabis as a basic resource, renewable and sustainable for generations to come. The defendant asks the court therefore to allow him to bring into play all issues surrounding Cannabis Prohibition for court review, in accordance with Article II, Section 1 of Arizona's Declaration of Rights.

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
In order for the government to remain free, it must recognize that individual rights are limits on government. Rights came first, then the form of government we chose to protect those rights. The preamble of the Arizona Constitution states: "We the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution." And the Declaration of Independence also states from whence our inalienable rights arise: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, that to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

Inalienable rights as defined by Blacks Law Dictionary are:
    "Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights e.g., freedom of speech or, religion, due process, and equal protection of the laws." [Morrison v State, MoApp., 252 S.W2d 97, 101.]

In "The Constitution of Arizona," by John R. Murdock, A.M., is the following explanation of Section 1, Article II of Arizona's Constitution: In the history of Anglo-Saxon peoples, there have been many struggles with arbitrary Kings. Our forefathers contended with King George for the inalienable rights of Englishmen in the Old Country had wrung their rights and liberties from tyrannical kings by force, or threat of force. The never-to-be-forgotten charters of Anglo-Saxon liberties are the Great Charter, or Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence...
The Constitution of the United States contains a Bill of Rights. Each of the other forty seven states has in its constitution a declaration of rights, or bill of rights, so Arizona but reiterated these ancient safeguards of individual liberty. In spite of our study of history each oncoming generation is apt to take too much for granted and to accept, unappreciatively, things as they are, forgetting the long struggle necessary to establish government by the people." (1)

 
 
Page 3 of 18
 
Technical Comments to the Webmaster [email protected]
 
Copyright 1997 Richard Davis