Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Constitutional argument for legalization of drugs?
Article 6 Section 1 Clause 2
Supremacy Clause: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;...shall be the supreme Law of the Land;
(no law can be made which violates the Constitution)
U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Section 1, Clause 3 -- Judges bound: and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
(judges are bound to follow the Constitution regardless of state or federal legislation that may contradict it)
U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Section 1, Clause 5 -- Oath of Office: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution
(everyone who makes laws, or executes them is bound by the Constitution to follow it above all other laws which might contradict it)
U.S. Constitution, Amendment 5, Clause 7 -- Due Process Clause: nor be deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property, without due Process of Law
(a person cannot be denied the right to live, be free to do what one chooses, own, use, sell and dispose of whatever property they so wish to choose without first being informed of a charge for violating another persons rights or damaging another persons property and being able to defend themselves in court before receiving punishment)
Maybe I'm just not reading the Constitution right, but I'm not seeing where the State can deny you Liberty and Property "if they have an interest in doing so" or because "public policy dictates it" or it's "against the moral character of society."
What do you think? Are drug laws Unconstitutional then?
Wow Phillip. You seem to be under the impression that everyone who does drugs is addicted to them and steals to get them. that has not been my observation in life. My observation is that everyone is addicted to something that makes them feel good. For some it's sex, some it's work, some it's money, some it's the internet, some it's drugs, some it's alcohol, I have never met someone who is not addicted to something on some level. It's not the action or the stimulant, it's the feeling the stimulant provides. Yes some chemicals are physically addictive, but only after they are used for a period of time. This is why even after the physical addiction is kicked, the person will always have the urge to do it. That's an awful vindictive opinion. Just my opinion, but you shouldn't be So judgmental.
For the record I'm liberal as well. Liberal is a person who has the ability to think freely with an open mind and changes their mind based on new information. I know the TVs labels a group that doesn't fit that definition as liberal. But it's no different than them labeling a group that wants more government as conservative. Plus I've seen a lot of your answers and you seem to be pretty level headed most of the time. This answer is below you I think.
3 Answers
- 9 years agoFavorite Answer
drug laws have always been unconstitutional from the beginning. you can thank the ignorant neocons for keeping them around today. RON PAUL 2012!!!
- Philip HLv 79 years ago
If Liberal Ideals which are used to dictate our behavior and the use of our assets were never instituted there would be no need for Drug Laws.
The Original Intent of the Constitution was to Prevent Tyranny. Our brilliant Founding Fathers set up a Government that was designed to Prevent Tyranny and accomplished that by Limiting Power. They understood th principle that Power Corrupts.
Liberty and Rights require all citizens to behave Responsibly.
They exist to support the progress of a Civilized Responsible Society.
When Liberal Socialist policies prevent holding the Irresponsible Liable for the Harm they cause, but instead, take the assets created by Responsible Citizens and use those assets to support the incompetent and parasites of society, the system fails.
Every Individuel MUST be Self-sufficient. They must be allowed to keep the fruits of their labors.
Drug abuse problems are a symptom created by the practice of taking assets from the responsible citizen and giving those assets to support the irresponsible parasites of our society.
Let drug abusers FAIL and the problem will be solved. Drug abusers steal from the productive to support their bad habits. The money ends up in the hands of criminals and terrorists.
Put those who steal in Jail. Not because they use drugs, but because they Steal!
If flow of money to the criminals and terrorists is cut off, the "War on Drugs" becomes unnecessary.
If the drug abuser who refuses to be responsible for their self-created problems is allowed to die in the gutter, the problem vanishes.
Yes, Quit this restriction on drug abuse and legalize the controlled distribution of non-addictive drugs.
Register the addicts so they can be helped.
If they refuse, let them suffer the consequences created by their OWN irresponsible activities.
- Anonymous9 years ago
Ron paul 2012
