🚀 go-pugleaf

"George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
news:jpRbj.34687$Pv2.16985@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
> D. Stussy wrote:
> > "Golden California Girls" <GldnCAGrls@aol.com.mil> wrote in message
> > news:XqmdnRiqY_svrfLanZ2dnUVZ_qainZ2d@championbroadband.com...
> >> In LA.EATS D. Stussy wrote:
> >>> "Golden California Girls" <GldnCAGrls@aol.com.mil> wrote in message
> >>> news:MeSdnaHPoOO4C_PanZ2dnUVZ_rWtnZ2d@championbroadband.com...
> >>>> In BA.FOOD Nomen Nescio wrote:
> >>>>> Drivers who see someone who appears to be
> >>>>> operating a vehicle under the influence of
> >>>>> alcohol or other substances can call (800) TELL-CHP,
> >>>>> said Officer Todd Workman of the CHP
> >>>>>
> >>>> Me thinks someone needs more days in lockup to think about their last
> > DUI
> >>> so
> >>>> they understand why they were put in a cage in the first place.  Too
> > bad
> >>> their
> >>>> DL can't have a big red "DUI" stamped over it so they can't buy booze
> >>> anymore.
> >>>
> >>> Of course that will never happen.  "DUI" stamped on their driver's
> > license
> >>> is unconstitutional.  The 21st Amendment (repealing "prohibition")
> > basically
> >>> says that any citizen of the age of majority has a constitutional
right
> > to
> >>> buy and consume alcoholic beverages.  In contrast, there is no right
to
> >>> operate a motor vehicle.
> >> "Amendment XXI
> >>
> >> Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of
the
> > United
> >> States is hereby repealed.
> >>
> >> Section 2. The transportation or importation into any state, territory,
or
> >> possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of
> > intoxicating
> >> liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
> >>
> >> Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been
> > ratified
> >> as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several
states,
> > as
> >> provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the
> > submission
> >> hereof to the states by the Congress."
> >>
> >> Seems like that only laws that support the eighteenth article of
amendment
> > are
> >> void.  So a City, County, State, or the Federal Government is free to
make
> > it
> >> illegal to drink in your front yard, on the beach or even be out in
public
> > under
> >> the influence, never mind drive a car or tax it.
> >>
> >> Now a convicted criminal has forfeit their constitutional rights.  So a
> > big red
> >> DUI stamp would be legal.  As would a law prohibiting anyone selling to
> > such a
> >> person.
> >
> > Tell me this:  With the 18th, which prohibited alcohol, being repealed,
it
> > is clear (by conclusion) that there IS a right to drink.  Furthermre,
via
> > the 10th, a state or local government has NO RIGHT TO REGULATE as via
the
> > constitutional amendments, the U.S. Government has reserved that right
to
> > itself.  Section 2 is a bit redundant but makes that clear.
> >
> >
>    Article 2 of the 21st Amendment allows each state the right to ban
> alcohol.

Wrong.  It's exactly the opposite.  It prohibits states from enacting such
laws.  It prohibits recognzing violations of laws resulting from states'
local laws.  (Otherwise, why would it need be said as the 18th, section 2,
gave the states the individual right to enforce prohibition?)