Constitutional Amendment Prohibiting Marijuana

[AdamLanes 1]

Shouldn't there be a constitutional amendment to prohibit marijuana, similar to the eighteenth amendment which prohibited alcohol? I think the war on drugs needs to end, marijuana legalized, and drug addiction treated as a health problem not a criminal issue. The black market (for drugs) promotes the vast majority of violence and crime associated with drug use. The black market will disappear with the decriminalization of drugs. Why is it that we needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol, but not to prohibit marijuana. I know that states (for example) have their own laws, but what about at the Federal level?

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Because the last hundred years has seen a continuous assault on State power by the Federal government. It is none of the Fed's business, just like highway speed limits weren't in the seventies (for example).

[ExAFO 0]

Quote

Because the last hundred years has seen a continuous assault on State power by the Federal government. It is none of the Fed's business, just like highway speed limits weren't in the seventies (for example).

Wrong. Google "Interstate Commerce Clause."

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I know how it was done; that doesn't change the fact that they are abusing that clause to poach on States' jurisdiction. IMO of course.

[billvon 3,120]

>Shouldn't there be a constitutional amendment to prohibit marijuana,
>similar to the eighteenth amendment which prohibited alcohol?

That one didn't work, why would one against marijuana?

>Why is it that we needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit
>alcohol, but not to prohibit marijuana . . .

We no longer have a constitutional amendment that prohibits alcohol. It was repealed because it didn't work.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Because the last hundred years has seen a continuous assault on State power by the Federal government. It is none of the Fed's business, just like highway speed limits weren't in the seventies (for example).

Wrong. Google "Interstate Commerce Clause."

Exactly. And, thanks to a rather "expansive" viewing of it, anything that anyone ever does can have an effect on interstate commerce.

While you're at it, google "A switch in time saves nine."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Why is it that we needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol, but not to prohibit marijuana.

Not sure, but perhaps it had something to with the size of the alcohol industry and the fact that alcohol was (and still is) so deeply ingrained in our society and our history. I think that alcohol consumption has always been viewed by most as a "normal" activity that pretty much everyone does; whereas marijuana use has always had a more negative perception by the general public. So making alcohol illegal was probably perceived as a much bigger deal than making marijuana illegal (and, well, it probably was a much bigger deal).

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Why is it that we needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol, but not to prohibit marijuana.

Not sure, but perhaps it had something to with the size of the alcohol industry and the fact that alcohol was (and still is) so deeply ingrained in our society and our history. I think that alcohol consumption has always been viewed by most as a "normal" activity that pretty much everyone does; whereas marijuana use has always had a more negative perception by the general public. So making alcohol illegal was probably perceived as a much bigger deal than making marijuana illegal (and, well, it probably was a much bigger deal).

No. Back then, it was understood that the Constitution prevented federal intervention in this stuff. You needed to amend the Constitution for the federal government to have control over it.

Over the course of the last century, it was determined that this is too much work. If the Constitution was instead viewed as "living" and "breathing" then the Constitution could be re-interpreted to allow banning of alcohol.

Congress could do it now if they wanted to.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[TrophyHusband 0]

i don't want the constitution used to prohibit the people from doing anything. i want it used to guarantee rights. outlawing anything can go somewhere else.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[kelpdiver 2]

I think we ended up with an amendment banning alcohol because it was a change enacted by people outside of DC - by those damn teetolers. Is anyone familiar with the movement?

Whether the underlying change is right or wrong (well, ok, wrong), we don't need an amendment to ban either. The California constitution is a bit of a joke - half the initiatives every year are ammendments to it as they're harder to repeal, making that document a bit of a joke.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

i don't want the constitution used to prohibit the people from doing anything. i want it used to guarantee rights. outlawing anything can go somewhere else.

+1

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[AdamLanes 1]

Quote

i don't want the constitution used to prohibit the people from doing anything.

I concur. My call for an amendment to prohibit marijuana was facetious. My point was two-fold: First there should be an end to the War on Drugs, and second the US Constitution does not authorize the Federal Government to prohibit marijuana.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Quote

i don't want the constitution used to prohibit the people from doing anything.

I concur. My call for an amendment to prohibit marijuana was facetious. My point was two-fold: First there should be an end to the War on Drugs, and second the US Constitution does not authorize the Federal Government to prohibit marijuana.

The history of mj prohibiton;
http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young