Legal & Policy Challenges

Prohibition didn't work in the 20th century ... and needs to END.

The USA government should at the very least be embarassed by its attempt to prohibit certain activities and the use of so-called "controlled substances". Not only is the War on drugs a war they have lost, but it is one that the government can not win. It must end now.

Legislators seem to have a mentality that just because they pass a law which bans something, that people will obey. Reality is often the opposite. Look back at the Prohibition of Alcohol and it seems obvious why that was later overturned. I just wonder why no one is smart enough to stop the stupid prohibition we have going on now.


Submitted by

Stage: Active

Feedback Score

351 votes
Voting Disabled

Idea Details

Vote Activity (latest 20 votes)

  1. Upvoted
  2. Upvoted
  3. Upvoted
  4. Upvoted
  5. Upvoted
  6. Upvoted
  7. Upvoted
  8. Upvoted
  9. Upvoted
  10. Upvoted
  11. Downvoted
  12. Downvoted
  13. Upvoted
  14. Upvoted
  15. Downvoted
  16. Upvoted
  17. Downvoted
  18. Upvoted
  19. Downvoted
  20. Downvoted
(latest 20 votes)

Similar Ideas [ 5 ]


  1. Comment

    I agree with this basic premise but would go further: just as in most states the sale of alcohol--the target of the original Prohibition--is regulated through licensure, the sale and use of "controlled substances" could be managed through governmental clinics comprised of medical and social services personnel who could 1) monitor use of such substances within safe dosages for those who choose to continue their "habit" and provide counseling for those who are interested in attempting to break the addiction. The price of the drugs could be made reasonable, based on actual cost of production minus the current "legal risk" factor and be taken out of the hands of the Mafia and other criminal elements who currently profit from them--as happened with alohol.

  2. Comment

    But there should be mandatory inpatient and then outpatient therapy for addicts.

  3. Comment

    I prefer the "MERP" model for re-legalization of cannabis, but I do prefer the "legalize, tax and regulate similar to alcohol" model for other currently illicit drugs. I would also like to point out that mostof what is called "drug related crime" is actually "prohibition related crime", get rid of prohibition 2.0 and get rid of all that crime, it also would end the power of the cartels and gangs -- no black market, no money for cartels and gangs and we all know that if there is no money, there is also no power. Additionally, there is all the money that would be saved in the areas of law enforcement, and courts, and prisons -- 800,000 people investigated, arrested, tried and imprisoned for drug "crimes" adds up to a huge cost to the taxpayers every year, not to mention the ongoing costs of keeping a prison population of over two million. Plus how many of you have been pretty much brushed off by the cops when reporting a burglary or other theft type crime? Legalizing all drugs under the two models I listed above would free up the time and respources for the police to investigate all property crimes (including the minor ones they now brush off) in addition to the violent ones (murder, assault, etc.), making a much safer life for every American and all tourists/visitors.

  4. Comment

    Legalize and decriminalize!

    Allowing the Government to control growth and distribution of Marijuana will do numerous things to help our culture and economy.

    1) Marijuana has never been known to be a problem drug for users and people near them.

    A) Marijuana users are not prone to using violence to solve disputes with other users or non-users.

    B) Marijuana users are not aggressive drivers, and are usually very cautious, unlike alcohol users.

    C) Marijuana users are seldom involved in

    criminal activities while using the drug.

    2) Government distribution of Marijuana is good for the economy.

    A) Taxes on marijuana use will contribute tens of millions of dollars in taxes, maybe more.

    B) Tax dollars will no longer be needed to fight the illicit marijuana drug trade.

    C) The American Court system will be relieved of a great financial and case load burden through legalization.

    D) American law enforcement will be able to use their funds and resources to address more serious issues of crime.

    3) Improvement in health issues.

    A) Users of marijuana for health issues will have a reduction in costs for the product, allowing them to use their resources for other aspects of health recovery.

    B) Consistency of the strength of marijuana products will be greatly improved, thus allowing health users a more predictable result.

    C) Elimination of stress for "illicit" users of marijuana for medical purposes. Users will no longer fear being jailed for using marijuana to settle their stomach after chemo, or increase their appetite when disease has taken it away.

    4) Marijuana by-products will be more available and scientific discoveries more frequent.

    A) Fiber for paper and textiles can be provided by the farms that grow marijuana.

    B) Oils from the rendering of plant fibers can be used for a myriad purposes including fuel, cooking and cosmetics.

    C) Derivatives may include control of glaucoma, a serious eye problem that causes blindness.

    As a non-user of marijuana, I see many more benefits than problems that will come about when the government takes control of this product. When marijuana and other drugs are controlled by government, fewer crimes will be committed in order to acquire the substances. Our society will be a much better place because of it. Government as an Ideal, should foster the personal and collective growth of it's members, not seek to punish them for their every transgression.

  5. Comment

    Never gonna happen. Obama will ignore this like he ignored the topic in his open house. Our government works for the corporations, not the people. The corporations do not want marijuana legal, so it will not be. Good luck, I hope we can win this fight, but it seems like there isn't even a fight, just a one sided argument falling on deaf ears.

  6. Comment

    It it true that prohibition did not work? Does anyone know if there were less alcoholic problems during prohibition?