If the law is basically the majority view of right and wrong, why are out of date laws kept?

Question

I'm thinking of marajuana use by people suffering from medical disorders who would benefit or in the past the banning of alcohol in 30's America. Or any number of petty laws which by and large are ignored by the majority.

Answer 1

You confuse Statutory Law with Parliamentary Law ( Acts of Parliament and Statutory Instruments authorised by the Acts)
with Common Law which is: "The law that he man on the Clapham Bus thinks it is. ) The man on the Clapham Bus is the average well informed citizen. This is not necessarily a majority view. The Courts make Common Law through precedent but if their is a clash between Common Law and Statutory Law, Statutory Law prevails. I don't know if their is a policy of repealing so called out of date laws but you will often find that the effect of a new statute is to amend or repeal an old one

Answer 2

Most out-dated laws remain on the books simply because of the time it would take to repeal them. (It is simply easier to ignore them.)

As for marijuana - the biggest issue is that there is no really good statistical evidence that demonstrates that the stuff is 'safe and effective' (to US medical standards) as a treatment for any medical condition.

Answer 3

It isn't the majority view anymore.
Capital punishment.
Smacking a naughty child.
The Common Market.
Smoking.
Do you think the law reflects the majority view?
As far as drugs go, if you could buy your drug of choice at the local chemist half the crime in the country would stop.

Answer 4

I appear to be answering my own question but there is a process in the UK to abolish out dated irrelevant laws.