|
|
Post by jessicanbarnhart on Feb 19, 2016 22:13:31 GMT
The 18th amendment of the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1918. It prohibited the sale, manufacture, or transportation of any kind of alcoholic beverages for consumption. It was repealed in 1933. I think this is one of the least important amendments because I don't believe that everyone is fully capable and able to handle their alcohol. Underage drinking And drunk driving are just a few incidences that kills so many people everyday because of a dumb decision to get behind the wheel while being intoxicated. For the 8th amendment, the right to fair fines and bail. No cruel or unsual punishment, I have mixed feelings about this. I don't believe a bail should be considered unless the person is proven innocent. It makes me feel unsafe to have dangerous people who are free all around me, even though I'm sure I come across some everyday. For the "cruel" punishment, I think if you commit a terrible crime like beating a helpless person to death or abusing a child or animal, you should have the same done to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by mook98 on Feb 20, 2016 4:36:28 GMT
18th amendment is a least important amendment, because Jessica explained that people aren't able to handle their alcohol beverage drinking. Those who do drinking and driving aren't very capable of handling the way they drive and could kill someone that is not guilty of doing anything. Alcohol could control your system and take over those of who drink it and kill others if u do anything disregardable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glen Brown - Instructor on Feb 20, 2016 23:38:25 GMT
Once again we find in this thread a choice of a specific amendment as being least important but then it is followed with points that contradict that position. If the effects of alcohol abuse and alcohol related deaths in the United States are such an important issue, then why would an amendment, which's purpose would have gone to addressing the listed issues be least important? I understand the point that you're trying to make but the evidence used to support would point towards the 21st Amendment (the one that repealed the 18th Amendment) being less important (or detrimental) not the 18th.
As far as your second choice; am I to understand that you would find nothing wrong with punishing someone who hasn't been found guilty of a crime and thus the burden of proof would be on the accused to prove his innocence? That throws out the whole innocent until proven guilty. Remember, there are plenty of crimes and specific criminal cases where bail is denied or not available. Also, without this amendment, less-than-scrupulous prosecutors could essentially bankrupt the innocent as well as the guilty for merely being accused of a crime. Sounds great until it's you or one of your family members. How about them fining someone a ridiculous amount for a lesser charge because they couldn't convict them of a higher charge? It could also be used to coerce people into pleading guilty of crimes they didn't commit just so they could get out of prison and so on and so on. That would be a really slippery slope no one wants to go down.
A good start though.
|
|
