when were illegal drugs introduced to the United States?
367172
When Chinese immigrants came to California in the 1850s to work in gold mines and then on the railroads, they brought opium smoking with them. It would be another twenty years before the "sporting" classes--gamblers, prostitutes, actors--began to join them.\n\nAs more and more Americans patronized opium dens and became addicted, communities responded with alarm and concern, especially when women and young people were among the curious. Cities and then states began passing anti-drug laws. Opium use spread steadily east, until by the 1890s, opium dens were commonplace in American life.\n\nAt a time when medicine was relatively primitive, doctors and patients gratefully embraced the array of opiates like morphine, laudanum (alcohol suffused with opium), paregoric (alcohol, opium, and camphor), and codeine. These drugs were easily obtained, and there was great enthusiasm and casual use. The widespread adoption of the hypodermic syringe made for faster more potent delivery of morphine. As one turn-of-the-century morphine addict bemoaned, "At first, habit only binds us with silken threads, but alas! these threads finally change to links of strongest steel."\n\nOnce the extremely debilitating power of addicting drugs was recognized, many American cities and states--starting with San Francisco in 1875--began passing anti-drug laws. In 1906, the Pure Food & Drug Act forced the patent medicine industry to list on the label the presence of certain dangerous drugs such as alcohol, opiates, cocaine, and cannabis
156458
Drug use was topping out, cocaine addiction was on the rise, and there was a steady population of about 200,000 heroin addicts in New york City alone, andother 50-70,000 upstate.  Nelson Rockefeller was governor at the time, and enacted legislation mandating a minimum one year to life in jail for more than a quarter ounce of coke or heroin.
884380
go to this website \nwww.illegalworld.com\nand find it on this website
753080
NEW: Homeland Security Report:\nhttp://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf \n\n40 pages of reports and pictures of pure insanity!\n\nDuring the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries.  Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine and marijuana, crossed into the U. S. from the Southern border.
94772
Drugs are illegal because of the amount of money the government earns and loses because of them. If we legalized drugs, the government would have great difficulty taxing them. Most drugs are imported illegally from forign countries. Right now, america gets a bunch of money from its war on drugs including busts and payoffs. As a giant corporation, it would be stupid to allow people to purchase outside of your domain. I would never say that america does not allow it because they are bad for you- so are cigarettes, alchohol, most legal diet pills, caffine. Did you know that caffine causes weight gain, the shakes and you can actually overdose and die from it. (granted, that is an extreme and rare case) so, they do allow things that are bad for us as long as it is taxable.
435399
hemp\n\ntoo bad it's been illegal since 1932 because those evil jazz musicians and Mexican immigrants get loopy and go raping white girls and going on crazed murder sprees when they smoke it.\n\nat least that seems to be only reason it was criminalized.\n\nunless it had something to do with the development of nylon by the company owned by the father-in-law of the guy who got it banned.
768394
100 years ago cocaine was legal. It was not until the pure food and drug act of 1906 that made cocaine and many other drugs illegal. The pure food and drug act of 1906 was signed into law by then President Teddy Roosevelt who one morning was eating a plate of sausage while reading the controversial book by Upton Sinclair The Jungle (About the practices of the meat processing industry, which at the time had human fingers and dead mice as part of the meat products going into the market). However, the ban on cocaine in the pure food and drug act of 1906 was only amplified in 1970 by the signing of the controlled substance act. Viagra though was a different story, in 1989 Pfizer was testing a cancer drug that had a side effect of treating erectile dysfunction, and then 9 years later was remarketed as Viagra. And finally to answer the main point of your question, it is not the drug dealers fighting among each other that are the problem with the drugs. It's the crooked bankers who launder their drug money, and what you do is take George Carlin's advice and you take about 10 of these bankers every Monday Night and you nail them to crosses during the halftime show of Monday Night Football, and then you get Marlboro Cigarettes and Dow Chemicals to sponsor the whole thing, and then you talk about that drug trade really slowing down. So it's not really a matter of legalizing drugs, just more a matter of taking away the source of money laundering that these drug dealers use.
74006
Because in the 1930s due to yellow journalism by William Randolf Hearst (owner of MANY newspapers at the time, he could control public oppinion) many lawmakers were convince that only minorities use marijuana, it makes mexicans think they are superior to whites, and it was making black people crazy (at that time, racism was in full swing. obviously this isnt true.). Hearst wanted to do that because he lost almost 1 million acres of forest (he uses forest for his newspaper, so losing that really hurt him, and now he had revenge.) to Pancho Villa.\n\nSo it was illegalized in the 1930s to get back at mexican americans mainly, because Pancho Villa was responsible. And many white americans at that time with power in government didnt know much, it wasnt that popular. They beleived whatever Hearst would tell them, he was a respectable newspaper baron to them.\n\nSo it was illegalized with no one reallying saying much then, becasue no one really used it. But then later in the 1960s it was discovered by most people in america, and since then it has only gained more and more popularity and has become a staple to american life. Last i heard (this varies on who you ask) it was 97% of high school seniors had at one point tried marijuana. Theres over 3 million daily users.\n\nSo thats how it became illegal: racism and no one knowing about it. But they reason it wont become legal is because the government started the war on drugs. When they have dumped trillions of dollars into a war on drugs over the years there is no way thier going to completey turn around and say they wasted all that money for no reason, it would be politically insane. no politician is dumb enough to do that.\n\nso if it were to be legal one day, it would be slow, and take years and years, and most likely it would take many other countries to do it  before the U.S. \n\ni think in maybe 30 years it will be legalized in the U.S. but then it will be 2036... a long ways off.\n\nalcohol isnt illegal because politicians are getting paid so much money from lobbyists to keep it legal. its making billions. just like ciggarette companies pay billions to politicians to get off thier backs. you cant destroy one part of the american economy, it would be rediculous. the bottom line to all of this is money. and if you take away alcohol, you take away money, and that wont happen. politicians LOVE money.
449799
That is a tough one.. There are sought to be made explanations but.. sifting through all of them, I believe it is: Around the year 1700, the slang verb cop entered English usage, meaning "to get ahold of, catch, capture." By 1844, cop showed up in print, and soon thereafter the -er suffix was added, and a policeman became a copper, one who cops or catches and arrests criminals. Copper first appeared in print in 1846, the use of cop as a short form copper occured in 1859
125718
I think illegal and nonlegal are the same thing..although the later is not a word.... and you should go to www.erowid.com...thats where i get my drug information... good times..
983315
son, you are not the first one to come up with it. it would be great, but we have to change how society thinks about weed not being a drug. california tried and failed. in the 90's
833021
Hello,\n\nWhat do you mean deal with them? Our government has been dealing drugs on our American streets since the 1960s.\n\nHere, read about what our CIA has been doing. How our own government is degrading our soceity through illegal drugs.\n\nHope this helps you......................................................   : - O
679637
My husband is a U.S. Marshall, so I know this! Anything that pertains to the production, use, or sale of any type of illegal, prescription, or non prescription drug.
439567
c'mon!!! get a grip !!! they have been trying 2 stop the drug trade 4 years. the war on drugs has cost " BILLIONS " of $$$$$ and nuttin' has changed except the names of the drugs bein' used at the time
617349
First off, shoomph, it was legal until 1937 -- when the Federal Marijuana Tax Act was passed, and actually it was still legal then -- if you bought a tax stamp. However, the Feds worded the law so that in order to buy the tax stamp, you had to bring the pot -- pot that was illegal if you didn't have a stamp.  Therefore, no one would ever get a stamp since they would have to bring illegal pot, and no one would do that since they would be arrested, and therefore no one ever bought a stamp and pot was illegal.  That's one hell of a legislative Catch-22.\n\nSecond, Fisha, it wasn't alcoholics who turned prohibition.\n\nIt was a nation of drinkers -- many more drinkers than are pot smokers now, relatively speaking.  A nation of drinkers and a nation tired of the war on alcohol (sound familiar?)\n\nIt was really the Roosevelt administration who ended prohibition.  It was one of the very first things his administration did after coming into power, first legalizing beer and wine, and then legalizing liquor again with the passage of the 21st amendment in 1933, ending 13 years of very unsuccessful prohibition.\n\nIn perspective, consider there were tens of thousands of drinkers in a population of between 900,000 and 132,000,000 during prohibition's years 1920 to 1933.  Conservative estimates are that between thirty and forty percent of the US population drank, and it was in all likelihood far more.\n\nThere were approximately 1,500 alcohol agents (Treasury) -- very tired agents -- tired of trying to enforce the unpopular law, tired of battling all the criminals who flourished through illegal alcohol sales and distribution.\n\nThere was little opposition to the end of prohibition.  The nation was tired of prohibition, and all that it caused.\n\nHere's where the paths of alcohol and marijuana prohibition diverge.  \n\nIn patterns of use -- alcohol had been socially and traditionally acceptable and fairly widespread in use.  Marijuana has been around as long as booze, but wasn't as widely used in the US and so it never became part of the mainstream culture.  \n\nIn sheer numbers -- alcohol was and still is used by a larger group of the populace than marijuana ever was.\n\nHigh estimates (no pun intended) of marijuana use at the turn of this century still only amount to perhaps ten percent of the populace, nothing near the thirty to forty percent or more who drink.  Assuming a figure as high as up to 25 million people are sparking one up at least every now and again, that's still less than ten percent of the overall population (around 265 million in 1999).\n\nThe issue of marijuana decriminalization is far more problematic than the repeal of alcohol prohibition for many reasons.\n\nIt's difficult to sort these reasons which are entwined in many ways, so I'll just trot them out together.\n\nThere's marijuana's placement in a special drug category (unlike alcohol).\n\nThere's a deeply entrenched federal antidrug police force, the DEA, which in numbers and budget is far beyond the mere 1,500 strong Treasury department of the 1920's and 1930's.\n\nThe DEA, along with State, county and municipal police forces are deeply entrenched in a multibillion dollar "war on drugs." Not to forget, the US Coast Guard, The Army and other armed services play substantial, costly roles in the war on drugs.  \n\nNext time you see a helicopter fly over, especially in the summer and fall -- in the country -- odds are it's a National Guard chopper flying a surveillance mission looking for pot.  I've even had one overfly my tomato garden, then do a quick return and hover-over until they either got their pictures or were satisfied that my tomato plants were just that, and not a couple of dozen pot plants.  I'd estimate in fuel and maintenance time, that made my tomatoes worth at least a few hundred bucks.  \n\nThe propaganda and rhetoric of seventy years of marijuana prohibition has skewed p
1048035
For the same reason we have every other law in this country.  It's basic civics.  There are certain things we know we shouldn't do, like kill people, but some person might anyways, and there has to be legislature for the person to be punished, setting an example that we shouldn't do these things. \n\nThe drug part is different.  If you came up with an entirely new drug right now, there would be no criminal law against using it, because there is no legal reference for it.  Here's an example:  Back in the 80's Ecstasy used to be legal.  You could buy it with your credit card in a bar, just like alcohol.  Then a shipment of a dangerous drug came over called, China Whites, that caused fatalities.  Congress freaked, declared Ecstasy a dangerous drug and declared it illegal.  The same thing for pot and mushrooms.  Somewhere along the line congress thought it was dangerous or being abused and had to declare it illegal.
861570
they wanted to buy drugs