Question

Hellllllp.................. plez (:


I have to write a response to : should the U.S. bring back the 18th amendment, or should we keep the 21st amendment. and why?

Answer 1

The 18th amendment was called 'the noble experiment'. There had been forces in the US since colonial times that wanted liquor to be banned. They called it 'the temperance movement', 'temperance' meaning moderation, but they actually wanted alcohol banned.

The 18th amendment grew out of 'The Progressive Era'. Starting at the beginning of the 20th century, the govt. began controlling dangerous drugs for the first time. And most people today think that was a good idea. Up to about 1905, you could walk into any drug store and buy opium, morphine, cocaine, etc. Patent medicines weren't required to list their ingredients on the label, so many of them contained these dangerous, addictive narcotic drugs. Even medicines for little children! Plus by 1905 there were still many veterans of the Civil War who had been addicted to these drugs ever since.

But you know how our government is--anything worth doing is worth overdoing. 8^) So by the end of WWII there were a majority of Americans who believed alcohol should be banned.

But the results were not what people expected. Americans actually drank MORE during Prohibition than before or afterwards! Making alcohol illegal led to the growth of organized crimes. The mobs were so rich they could bribe police all across the country. And because they 'owned' the police departments, the mobs could do lots of other things--prostitution, gambling, drugs, etc.etc.--as they put it, just giving people what they wanted. All of this went away when the 21st amendment was passed. Police got more honest, and all the mob activities were greatly decreased.

Today we have similar problems with drugs. Drug gangs inside and outside the US get so much money that they're able to buy off the police and border guards, to finance other criminal activities, buy powerful weapons, and they get into wars between themselves where lots of civilians are caught in the crossfire. Not that some drugs -shouldn't- be controlled to some extent by the govt., but I think most people today see that the laws against drugs often do more damage than the drugs themselves. Legalizing marijuana, for instance, would probably be a good thing because marijuana has never been shown to be very harmful or addictive.

Alcohol is legal today but still controlled. The fed. govt. controls its manufacture and import mostly through taxation. States make it illegal to sell it to minors, or to buy it for minors. Bartenders in most states are not allowed to serve drinks to someone who is already clearly drunk. And of course you can get into trouble for driving under the influence or operating dangerous machinery. I think that's the proper approach, not just banning it altogether.