Prohibition Amendment?

[manifold]

If the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, how come the prohibition of marijuana and other narcotics did not?


Any ideas?

 

[manifold]

Anyone, anyone?

Bueller?

 

[Care4all]

If the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, how come the prohibition of marijuana and other narcotics did not?


Any ideas?

Very good question and i don't know, can only guess...

They were abolished except by doctor's prescription...for marijuana and cocaine....

maybe they got around it because it was not really abolished in the beginning because it allowed doctors to prescribe it?

Marijuanna/Hemp was a GVT MANDATORY crop for all farmers at one time in the usa...the govt mandated that it be grown by all farmers for the use of making Rope which the government was in need of for their sea vessels.... It was the number one crop grown in America for it's use in making Rope and making Paper.

care

 

[ReillyT]

Anyone, anyone?

Bueller?

I would guess (just a guess) that an amendment was required for alcohol because it preceded the expansion of the "interstate commerce clause." That is just my guess. Today, a constitutional amendment would probably not be required to outlaw alcohol production and sale.

 

[manifold]

Today, a constitutional amendment would probably not be required to outlaw alcohol production and sale.

If precedent means anything at all, then absolutely no amendment would be required.

 

[mattskramer]

If the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, how come the prohibition of marijuana and other narcotics did not?

Any ideas?

Wow. Insightful. I just don’t know the answer – assuming that there is one. (Shrug)

By the way, we need an emoticon that shrugs its shoulders to suggest "I don't know." I'd probably use it a lot.

 

[nibor]

Wow. Insightful. I just don’t know the answer – assuming that there is one. (Shrug)

By the way, we need an emoticon that shrugs its shoulders to suggest "I don't know." I'd probably use it a lot.

Um let me guess................IT COULDN'T BE PATENTED..............OR COPY WRITTEN...............BY CORPORATE SHANKS...........

And being the most important plant on the face of this earth had to be made inaccessable!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[CrimsonWhite]

The Volstead Act essentially became an amendment to make it more ironclad. The law was vetoed then overidden and became law, but Congress, n their infinite wisdom, saw the need to make it enforcable. The amendment was not neccesary, more like overkill.

Another instance where this was deployed is the Defense of Marriage Amendment. Uneccesary due to current laws, but overkll.

 

[Diuretic]

The Volstead Act essentially became an amendment to make it more ironclad. The law was vetoed then overidden and became law, but Congress, n their infinite wisdom, saw the need to make it enforcable. The amendment was not neccesary, more like overkill.

Another instance where this was deployed is the Defense of Marriage Amendment. Uneccesary due to current laws, but overkll.

Sounds like it was a bit of political theatre. There may have been a moral panic at the time and the politicians decided to really dress up their legislative response.

 

[Annie]

How about it had been legal? Prohibition made it illegal. The drugs cited were never legal.

 

[Taomon]

If the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, how come the prohibition of marijuana and other narcotics did not?


Any ideas?

To make it Federal. Most law enforcement and State level legislatures consider drugs bad, but alchohol good. So it had to be a Federal mandate to enforce it...and we all know how well that idea worked.

I say, legalize it all.

 

[Taomon]

How about it had been legal? Prohibition made it illegal. The drugs cited were never legal.

Marijuana, cocaine, heroin, opium, mescaline, LSD were all legal at one time.

 

[Ravi]

How about it had been legal? Prohibition made it illegal. The drugs cited were never legal.

actually, they were.

 

[Annie]

Marijuana, cocaine, heroin, opium, mescaline, LSD were all legal at one time.

Really? As opposed to no laws regulating? Tell me.

 

[manifold]

Really? As opposed to no laws regulating? Tell me.

Ummm, no laws regulating = legal by default.

If you can't understand this simple truth, you're not worth a tinker's cuss.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Really? As opposed to no laws regulating? Tell me.

There are no laws against snorting jello up your nose. That means it cannot be prosecuted, therefore legal by default.

 

[Taomon]

Really? As opposed to no laws regulating? Tell me.

You stated that these drugs that I listed were never legal. That is inaccurate. Cocaine was legal for a long time and was used in medicine and coca-cola.

Marijuana was also legal from the beginning of the nation. Some of our fore-fathers had weed crops. Hemp makes great paper & rope.

LSD and Mescaline were also legal, and were expirimented with for years before the Feds saw that too many people began to use it as a recreational drug with a specific under-current of ant-establishment sentiment.

Do I really need to go on? These drugs were legal and there was no regulation of them until religious fanatics and tyrannical politicians deemed the use a threat to their security (as opposed to the well being of the user). That is why we have criminal offenses as opposed to treatment for drug use and alchohol is a major industry.

 

[Gunny]

If the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, how come the prohibition of marijuana and other narcotics did not?


Any ideas?

I do not have a dictionary definition answer. However, I would venture a guess that the size and amount of power the Federal government has assumed and endowed upon itself from then to now would make a REAL difference.

Then there is the public outcry, or lack thereof. Apparently, there was enough public outcry back in the day that an Amendment could actually be passed by Congress. Nobody really gives a damn about pot except the same minority of do-gooders that wants to tell everyone else how to live in every facet of life. There is no overriding public will -- not enough people brainwashed with propaganda -- to gain the kind of support Prohibition did.

 

[Foxfyre]

There are no laws against snorting jello up your nose. That means it cannot be prosecuted, therefore legal by default.

This is true. Unless snorting jello should infringe on anybody else's life, liberty, property, opportunities, etc. etc. etc. protected by the Constitution, it is presumed legal. And any other substance that is not specifically designated as illegal or by prescription only and that does not infringe on anybody else's constitutional or legal rights is also presumed illegal.

Personally I think alcohol was banned via constitutional amendment because it was so much a part of the American way of life and that was the ONLY way to effectively ban it. Social pressures for virtue and morality in that day also got the amendment ratified, but, like any such laws that people do not choose to obey, it quickly created a vast underground illegal commercial network producing a product people wanted but could not acquire legally. And that illegal network proved to be far more of a problem than any obviously created by alcohol alone. So the amendment was repealed.

Cocaine was legal and as widely used in Colonial and Victorian America up to the early 20th Century and was as debilitating then as it is now. Because of its negative effects it became socially unacceptable much as tobacco has become socially unacceptable now. And when enough people agreed that cocaine was unacceptably harmful, it, along with various other narcotic substances, was made illegal on the open market but this time without a constitutional amendment to do it. And voila, the effect was the same and we now have a huge illegal underground network producing and providing the stuff to people who want it.

Most people do not buy and use illegal substances, however. Would making the substances legal encourage more people to use them? Recovering addicts say yes. I honestly don't know.

 

[nibor]

You stated that these drugs that I listed were never legal. That is inaccurate. Cocaine was legal for a long time and was used in medicine and coca-cola.

Marijuana was also legal from the beginning of the nation. Some of our fore-fathers had weed crops. Hemp makes great paper & rope.

LSD and Mescaline were also legal, and were expirimented with for years before the Feds saw that too many people began to use it as a recreational drug with a specific under-current of ant-establishment sentiment.

Do I really need to go on? These drugs were legal and there was no regulation of them until religious fanatics and tyrannical politicians deemed the use a threat to their security (as opposed to the well being of the user). That is why we have criminal offenses as opposed to treatment for drug use and alchohol is a major industry.

I'm not sure that your original statement is totally correct, opium was legal, I'm not sure that heroin was.................

As far as hemp goes, our forefathers had not only crops, there were plantations full...................and the uses you gave were WAAAAAAY understated........

LSD was forced on the scene BY THE FED as a social experiment............while testing it on our military which they're still doing.