Every major study of the subject in history has said that prohibition is the wrong approach. You can read tthem at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer under Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy.
You should also read the history of the marijuana laws at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm The story is funny, fascinating, and suprising. The laws were absolute lunacy. The US Official Expert on marijuana testified in court, under oath, that when he tried marijuana it turned him into a bat.
See also the story of how the marijuana gateway myth got started at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/gateway_myth.htm
If you want to understand the full story on the drug laws, the one book to read is the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm Itt is probably the best single overall review of the subject ever written. It will give you a good summary of what you would learn if you read all the other thousands of documents in the online library.
In short, it says that the drug laws were the product of ignorance and nonsense, and were a disaster from the very beginning.
As far as them being unconstitutional, the way they got around that was that the passed the laws as "tax acts". Everyone involved agreed that the Constitution would not allow direct prohibition. But the Constitution does allow Congress to levy taxes on anything. Furthermore, the taxes can be any amount -- even if the amount is so high that paying the tax would make doing business impossible. Therefore, they did two things. First they made a very high tax. Second, they required a license to pay the tax and never issued any licenses.
Then, because they knew that no one had any licenses and no one had paid any tax, they arrested people for "tax" violations, not really drug offenses. The entire scheme was declared unconstitutional in the case of Timothy Leary v. US in 1969, on the grounds that it violated the Fifth Amendment protections on self-incrimnation. That is, you couldn't get the license until you had the marijuana in hand. Therefore, applying for the license requred a person to admit they were already in violation of the law.
That scheme was replaced by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 which is based on the Federal power to regulate interstate commerce. Basically, their argument is that anything and everything potentially affects interstate commerce -- including the fruits, vegetables, and other plants you my grow in your own home purely for your own use.
Therefore, the Feds are given the power to regulate the trade. They regulate the trade by banning it. They simply make it illegal to make it, transport it, or sell it. There is no constitutional right for anyone to make or sell any particular product. By making the trade illegal, they dont have to address the question of whether a personal prohibition is illegal. There is no way you can legally buy it, so whether you used it is irrelevant. The crime is committed at the time of purchase, not at the time of use.
The scheme was used for the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914, the National Firerams Act of 1933 (which regulated machine guns), and the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.
You can find a discussion of the issue in the histories linked above. You can find the full transcripts of the hearings for the Marihuana Tax Act at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/taxact.htm It is discussed during those hearings.
You can find the Timothy Leary decision at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1960/learyvus.htm
These are the essential references on the subject. Do not accept opinions from anyone who is not familiar with this information.
2006-12-07 19:34:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cliff Schaffer 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well for me it's ok wish it was just legal no Gov crap, but since Washington legalized it that good. People freak out on it though they believe the propaganda they sold the American public back in the 50's. To me the quicker we can end the war on drugs the quicker the 2nd amendment is protected since now they think that because their legalizing Marijuana now it's time to take something. How absurd are people I think people should be made to read the Constitution, and bill of rights before holding any kind of opinion on Law. As far right as I am this one I side with most liberals on. Marijuana laws are draconian and should be repealed, but leave the 2nd alone.
2016-05-23 05:45:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Susan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some of these answers make me roll my eyes! Marijuana is NOT addictive! It is NOT a gate way drug. Nobody has ever overdosed on it. Driving after drinking alcohol is so much worse than driving stoned. It absolutely should be legalized. Our country could tax it and control it. I've done tons of research on the subject, and I mean real research, like from reading hundreds of books and web sites, not just smoking it. I believe to each his own. If you go to a bar and get drunk, why can't I sit on my couch, smoke a little something and watch a good movie with friends? I'm not going to be the one crashing my car and injuring people. Have you seen the commercials lately with the kids on the couch, or the sober kid driving his stoner friends around? The point of these commercials is that smoking pot isn't going to kill you, it's just going to make you lazy and have no ambition in life. This may be true for some, but I know dozens of people who have excellent careers and smoke a joint here and there. They just know that there's a time and a place. Basically, I'm saying it's not as bad as drinking alcohol and it should be legalized with laws like alcohol. For example, you should have to be 21 to purchase it, you shouldn't have any with in your reach while driving a car, you shouldn't drive under the influence, etc.
2006-12-07 18:30:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by pitlover 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I started smoking weed three years back. I got hooked, and it was fun at first, but after about a year and a half it stopped working so I moved onto meth, cocaine and other harder drugs. I lost lots of weight, overdosed and had a seizure, started stealing **** all the time, cuz if I didn't have my stuff it was no bueno... I had to go to rehab for a year and it cost a hell of alot of money. It's alot harder just to live simple life without "the crutch" now, and I think if it were legal, more people would be going through this cycle... and it really sucks - so to me it just seems like a bad idea.
2006-12-07 17:54:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
the current prohibition of marijuana is ridiculous. It's been proven to have medicinal value, and the users generally avoid violence, or at the very least are no more violent than they would be without the drug. The excuse that it's a gateway drug is preposterous as well. The only reason that it tends to lead our children to harder drugs is that it's illegal and, therefore, equated with harder drugs in enforcement, and the propaganda that we, as a society, teach our kids.
2006-12-07 18:30:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by mike w 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
I was thinking I wish I had some. (~...~)Was on the ballot in NV.for the second time & defeated.I wish I watch the returns to see How many voted for & against.I do not like Paying for all the illeagels in our prisons nor our own in them . They will realize one of these days that Alchol is worse, and the gov.will have to make it legel.If they had done long ago there wouldn't be so much of the worse things that they come up with around now. Thanks for the Question! take care 2b4fun
2006-12-07 17:48:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by 2b4.fun 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think all the currently illegal drugs should be made legal and available to those who want them, after they have been isolated from the rest of us. No medical help at tax payer's expense of course.
If they want to fry their brains, let em.
2006-12-07 18:02:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Gaspode 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Well I'm thinking your punctuation is a little off, but that is not a danger to anyone--I often punctuate while I'm under the influence myself. As for legalizing it? Absolutely--that we it can be taxed and controlled. These false wars, like the "war on Christmas" that isn't, is a way for people with limited thinking abilities to feel that they can control the world and feel "victimized" too.
2006-12-07 17:33:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by catcha22 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't get where some governmental body of people can start legislating against a natural plant. Its' ridiculous. If alcohol is a tiger, marijuana is a mouse.
2006-12-07 17:27:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
i dont like a person under the influence of any substance that will alter the persons state of mind driving on the road while i am with my son, or not for that matter because i really want him growing up without his mommy or daddy. thats my thoughts on marijuana, alcohol and anything else like that.
2006-12-07 17:27:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jessy 5
·
1⤊
3⤋