events that led to the end of prohibition #1

History repeats itself.
So, it might be a good idea to study what successfully ended the first prohibition. This gives us clues as to the indications as to the end of our current one.
Interestingly enough, the first prohibition was started by conservative christian fundamentalists just as the current prohibition was.

It led to the great depression and coincided with world war 1.
It ended once enough americans were going to jail, enough propaganda was generated and once a decent president was elected.

So research this topic and post more about how it ended. :thumbsup:






By 1931, most people had realized that National Prohibition had been a mistake and were ready to repeal it. Almost all, except for President Hoover, who actually increased government spending on Prohibition law enforcement. Soon, the entire nation was clamoring for repeal, and not even the president could do anything to stop it.

The 1932 presidential election came and a new president was elected, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (more commonly known as FDR). Within a month of his election, the alcohol content allowed in beer was raised to 3.2 percent. Soon an amendment to the constitution was proposed. It was on December 5, 1933 that Utah was the 36th state to ratify the 21st amendment and end National Prohibition. This made the 18th amendment the only constitutional amendment to be repealed.

After that, it was the states' job to decide if a state prohibition was necessary. Most states got rid of state prohibitions, but Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma kept their prohibition laws in place the longest. Kansas ended statewide prohibition in 1948, whereas Oklahoma ended theirs in 1959. The longest state prohibition was Missouri, who ended state prohibition in 1966, almost 35 years after National Prohibition was repealed.
http://library.thinkquest.org/04oct/00492/index.htm

The advocates of Prohibition had waged a 50-year campaign to ban alcohol and had high hopes for this "The Noble Experiment." Supporters anticipated that alcohol's banishment would lead to the eradication of poverty and vice while simultaneously ennobling the common man to achieve his highest goals. The reality of Prohibition was to prove quite different.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snpmech2.htm

So it lasted for about 50 years? How long has the current prohibition been going on?

an excellent site i found about "probihibition 1 & 2"



http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ct-prohibition.html



When you consider that almost two thirds of the people in federal prison are serving time for a prohibition-related offense (and half of them for a first time, non-violent offense), the actual cost of prohibition begins to become obvious -- And we haven't even talked about how much money we spend on extra policeman, DEA agents, Judges, and lawyers. Federal and State governments spend nearly $40 Billion dollars on the direct costs of prohibition. But that doesn't include all of the extra spending on police and prisons, nor does it include other periphery costs such as loss of income due to incarceration, etc. Some people estimate the total cost of prohibition to be at least 70 BILLION dollars a year.

In southern Kentucky, alcohol sales are still illegal. No alcohol can be sold at anytime.

So, certain people drive north to Madison county, the southernmost county in Kentucky that allows alcohol sales. There, they buy as much beer and liquor as their vehicles can hold, then drive back down south and sell it all for profit, illegally.

Bootleggers are still working in America today, just like drug dealers.

Prohibition simply does not work.

America legalized "Marihuana" to support our troops during World War 2.

http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p...0for%20victory

Both conservatives and liberals have waged their war on drugs for decades, and they have reaped nothing but drug gangs, drug lords, robberies, thefts, muggings, murders, dirty needles, overcrowded prisons, decimated families, record drug busts, government corruption, infringements on civil liberties, violations of financial privacy, massive federal spending, and, of course, ever-glowing statistics reflecting drug-war "progress."

Americans would be wise to reject, once and for all, the war on drugs, and cast drug prohibition, like booze prohibition, into the ashcan of history.

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2006/0...rnberger.shtml

As accurate knowledge about drug effects and drug policies becomes more widespread, most people in most countries of the world will likely choose not to retain full-scale criminalized drug prohibition. Most places will eventually develop their own varied local forms of regulated personal cultivation and use of the once prohibited plants and substances. Many places will also eventually allow some forms of commercial growing, production, and sale â?? first of all and above all of cannabis, which is by far the most widely grown, traded, sold, and used illegal drug in the world.

All of this will take time. Prohibitionists and drug warriors in every country will fight tenaciously to maintain their local regimes. And enormous power will be employed to prevent the Single Convention of 1961 and its related treaties from being repealed, or even modified. As a result, in coming years, all around the world, there will be even greater public discussion and debate about drug prohibition, about criminalized drug policies, and about the world-wide movement within drug prohibition to decriminalize the possession and use of cannabis, cocaine, heroin and other substances.

As part of that process of conversation and debate, many more people will discover â?? often with considerable astonishment â?? that they have lived for decades within a regime of world-wide drug prohibition. That growing understanding will itself push world-wide drug prohibition closer to its end. Here in the 21st century, it may turn out that the most powerful force holding global drug prohibition in place is the secret of its existence.

http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/levine.secret.html

In the early 1900s, the western states developed significant tensions regarding the influx of Mexican-Americans. The revolution in Mexico in 1910 spilled over the border, with General Pershing's army clashing with bandit Pancho Villa. Later in that decade, bad feelings developed between the small farmer and the large farms that used cheaper Mexican labor. Then, the depression came and increased tensions, as jobs and welfare resources became scarce.

One of the "differences" seized upon during this time was the fact that many Mexicans smoked marijuana and had brought the plant with them.

However, the first state law outlawing marijuana did so not because of Mexicans using the drug. Oddly enough, it was because of Mormons using it. Mormons who traveled to Mexico in 1910 came back to Salt Lake City with marijuana. The church was not pleased and ruled against use of the drug. Since the state of Utah automatically enshrined church doctrine into law, the first state marijuana prohibition was established in 1915. (Today, Senator Orrin Hatch serves as the prohibition arm of this heavily church-influenced state.)

Other states quickly followed suit with marijuana prohibition laws, including Wyoming (1915), Texas (1919), Iowa (1923), Nevada (1923), Oregon (1923), Washington (1923), Arkansas (1923), and Nebraska (1927). These laws tended to be specifically targeted against the Mexican-American population.

When Montana outlawed marijuana in 1927, the Butte Montana Standard reported a legislator's comment: "When some beet field peon takes a few traces of this stuff... he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico, so he starts out to execute all his political enemies." In Texas, a senator said on the floor of the Senate: "All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff [marijuana] is what makes them crazy."
http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stori...naIllegal.html