There is a general guiding philosophical principle, that drugs should be used only for medical reasons, and not for recreational reasons. If people can obtain happiness simply by using a drug, this is a distraction from genuine accomplishments in life which bring a more genuine type of happiness. There is also the concern that when people are under the influence of recreational drugs, their judgment is impaired and they may do foolish or destructive things. Recreational drug use is simply not good for people. There are better forms of entertainment. Marijuana is a complicated case, because it is used both for medical purposes and for recreational purposes. Also, it is not as addictive, and is less destructive to sanity, than many other drugs. One could argue that even alcohol, which is legal, is more dangerous than marijuana. But there is a lingering sense that legalizing marijuana would be just a surrender to foolish (if not sinful) hedonism.
In the US, marijuana was criminalized by the federal government in the 1937.
Under federal law, marijuana is treated like every other controlled substance, such as cocaine and heroin. The federal government places every controlled substance in a schedule, in principle according to its relative potential for abuse and medicinal value. Under the CSA, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that the federal government views marijuana as highly addictive and having no medical value. Doctors may not "prescribe" marijuana for medical use under federal law, though they can "recommend" its use under the First Amendment.
Marijuana is not completely legal in any country there are laws that say its okay to possess and use it if you dont have a lot, but on a federal level the government does not want you to have it at all.
because it was deemed by the federal government to have no medicinal value ,i guess, check out the history of marijuana on history channel
Federal Government's argument - Since the US Constitution does not say anything about marijuana in it, the rule is as follows: If a topic isn't detailed in the constitution, then the state government has the power to make a ruling on said topic. However, marijuana is declared an illegal controlled substance by the United States government, and therefore they do not recognize state's ruling on the use of medical marijuana. Also, it's rumored that because the Federal Government can not *yet* collect taxes on marijuana sales, they feel left out.Medical Marijuana - The use of marijuana for medical reasons is recognized by multiple states. Their main argument is that marijuana is a completely natural plant, and it is proven that marijuana usage DOES help for various medical issues such as pain, anxiety, depression, anorexia, insomnia, etc.
No
any amount of marijuana transported across state lines via mail is felony and prosecuted by the federal government if discovered.
State.
By the plant it is regulated by the strain of marijuana and the growing conditions of each plant. By the government it is not regulated, it is illegal.
The constitution grants states the ability to govern themselves almost completely. The only time the federal government can directly intervene is either by request of the state government or if there is a crime committed that crosses state lines (and thus covers multiple jurisdictions). So, even if there is a federal law against something (like medical marijuana), the state can essentially veto it.
Possession of any amount of Marijuana is prohibited by federal statute. However, as a practical matter, possession of marijuana is rarely prosecuted by the federal government in any quantity. Federal law enforcement resources are usually directed to manufacture and distribution of controlled substances.
yes before the federal goverement banned it