Should the Federal Government Legalize the Use of Marijuana - Research Paper Example

Table of Contents Table of Contents Should The Federal Government Legalize The Use Of Marijuana? 2 Executive Summary 2 Introduction 3 The use of Marijuana in America 4 Drugs, Crime and Public Health 5 The Supposed ‘Benefits’ of Marijuana 7 Research 8 Conclusion 12 Recommendations 13 References 17 Should The Federal Government Legalize The Use Of Marijuana? Executive Summary The recent moves to legalize the use of marijuana is extremely ill-advised. Studies have established that marijuana has numerous adverse effects on the human mind and body. In addition, marijuana reduces the inhibitions of an individual, resulting in a situation in which the individual feels inspired to try other more hardcore drugs that may be available. The fact that marijuana affects the perceptive tendencies of users also means that they are likely to be the cause of serious traffic accidents. There are numerous studies that have been conducted to prove that using marijuana to treat medical anomalies, such as constant pain, are quite effective. Such studies have been quoted as proof of the good qualities of the drug whenever the subject of legalizing marijuana is brought up. However, most of these studies do not tackle the issue about common mental problems that are experienced by patients when they consume marijuana in order to contain pain symptoms. It is a recognized fact that marijuana can cause anxiety problems, as well as depression, in all users. Using marijuana can also set off schizophrenic characteristics in individuals who are predisposed to getting this condition. These are facts that are never directly addressed by scholars who study marijuana users. Introduction The word ‘marijuana’ refers to a concotion of flowers, dried leaves, seeds and stems that originate from Cannabis sativa, which is the hemp plant. This mixture has mind-altering substances like delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), among other related chemicals. This concoction usually also contains substances such as hash oil and hashish. Marijuana is said to be the most popular illegal drug in nations all around the world. There are a number of nations that have taken the step of banning its use, however. In America, the Federal Government does not support the proposed legalization of marijuana which has been proposed by many state governments. This means that, in some cases, federal laws will clash with state laws. There are 18 states that have legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes. In other states, local governments are involved in debates concerning the legalization of marijuana for medical, as well as social purposes. For the most part, many users of marijuana do not consider the adverse effects of the drug, when proposing its legalization. This is something that has marked the majority of debates in which the advocates of the legalization of marijuana support the notion that it has medicinal properties that even serve to improve the physical, as well as emotional, constitutions of its users. The efforts of such advocates in the United States, in particular, have been supported through the addition of millions of dollars into lobbying efforts as well as advertising gimmicks. In most of the 18 states that have passed laws to allow for the medical use of marijuana, such as Washington and Colorado, there are different decriminalization rules that have been applied. federal government. One of the puzzling concepts that attend this debate has to do with the interpretation of terms such as ‘legalization’ and ‘decriminalization’. In some circumstances, these words are actually used interchangeably. However, the fact is that they have different meanings. The advocates of legalization actually support the removal of all barriers against the public use of marijuana. Decriminalization, however, has more to do with the situation in which people who require marijuana for medicinal purposes are allowed to access it without fear of prosecution. The use of Marijuana in America According to Fergusson, Horwood and Ridder (2005), past generations of America were completely against the legalization of any type of mind altering substances- including marijuana. In recent times, though, the American public has changed in its estimation of substances such as marijuana. Most of the baby-boomers were teenagers and young adults when the free love and drugs themed 60s began to transform American society. The subsequent generation was even less committed to maintaining the laws that governed the use of drugs such as marijuana. It is suspected that this is the reason why recent surveys have shown that Americans today may actually vote to legalize marijuana in all states. Other public officials such as government officers and police officials, are less enthusiastic about legalizing drugs such as marijuana. According to Budney, Vandrey, Hughes, Thostenson and Bursac (2008), the war of mind altering substances has not been completely successful since it was initiated by the Nixon administration. Many scholars who support the banning of all drugs feel that the legalization of the use of marijuana will be detrimental because it would result in a sharp rise in the abuse of the drug by increasingly underage youths. They also believe that the nation’s economy is likely to be negatively affected by the subsidizing if drug addicts. According to Caulkins and Sevigny (2005) the legalization of marijuana would generate the emergence of a large market for drugs. The opponents of marijuana legalization usually emphasize their claims by stressing that programs against the use of drugs in schools have been able to successfully convince the youth to steer clear of drugs. There are other reasons why the legalization of drugs would not be beneficial in any aspect for society. Drugs, Crime and Public Health Decriminalization and depenalization are processes that have used by various governments to handle drug consumption in their nations. When nations use depenalization, they create rules which stipulate that drugs are illegal, even though the custody of small amounts of drugs have minor penalties like fines, instead of imprisonment. Beginning with the 1970s, different American states began to consider the prospect of depenalizing the possession of small quantities of marijuana by treating them as mere misdemeanors. Nations such as Mexico went further by making depenalization cover misdemeanors such as the possession of half a gram of other drugs such as cocaine (Room, Fischer, Hall, Lenton and Reuter, 2010). Portugal is the only nation that has actually decriminalized the recreational use of all types of drugs. In Portugal, offenders can be ticketed and then have to be arraigned before a panel with three members, which may have health-related, legal and even social services specialists. It is such panels that are empowered to suspend any type proceedings lawbreakers who are offending for the first time. Such panels can also compel drug addicts to attend treatment centers, or pay fines. In all the nations in which drugs such as marijuana, as well as other hard drugs have been decriminalized, though, there has not been any improvement in the numbers of petty and serious drug-related crimes that are committed. It is an established fact that petty theft cases would be drastically increased if drugs, such as marijuana, were legalized. According to Hall and Degenhardt (2009) law enforcement officials in cities such as Amsterdam, which have legalized the consumption of drugs in certain coffee shops, have admitted that the incidences of burglary, auto theft and shoplifting increased considerably after the legalization of certain drugs. The existence of turf wars was also not affected by the decriminalization of recreational drugs. Even areas which had active criminal organizations, such as the Mafia, directing drug related processes, were not affected in any way by the decriminalization legislation (Welch, 2009). Organized crime syndicates would simply turn to alternative criminal activities like gambling, loan sharking, organ trade and prostitution to keep making benefits. Legalizing drugs is also dangerous because it can jeopardize the health of users, as well as non-users. It is a recognized fact that smoking marijuana can result in adverse changes in brain function that support addictive behaviors. The recreational use of marijuana can also result in dangerous lung disorders such as wheezing and chronic coughing. This is caused by the elevated amounts of carbon dioxide, as well as tar, that are inhaled when people use marijuana. According to respected organizations, such as the American Lung Association, marijuana has 50-70% more materials that are known to cause cancer than cigarettes contain (Li, Brandy, DiMaggio, Lusardi, Tzong and Li, 2012). Smoking marijuana also causes users to experience anxiety, depression and panic attacks. This consequently interferes with ordinary mental processes such as concentration, reaction time, alertness and coordination- which can result in increased probabilities for causing road accidents. It also increases the probability of users engaging in risky behaviors such as engaging in spontaneous fights and having sexual encounters with virtual strangers (Li, Brandy, DiMaggio, Lusardi, Tzong and Li, 2012). Youthful users of marijuana who are unable to concentrate on what they are learning will not be able to acquire academic achievements that will improve. or sustain their future lives. The Supposed ‘Benefits’ of Marijuana The advocates for the legalization of marijuana try to extol its advantages as much as the opponents of legalizing it warn of its dangers. However, it is obvious that the supporters of the legalization of marijuana tend to bank on neutralizing any arguments that are aimed at frankly describing the harmful effects of the drug. Many advocates for legalization tend to emphasize that the consumption of alcohol is far more dangerous than the consumption of marijuana. In regards to psychological issues, most individuals who regularly smoke marijuana insist that they are not psychologically dependent on the drug. The reality is that this argument, in addition to the one seeking legalization, is based on hedonistic impulses. Such individuals desire to have the right to use marijuana in recreational ways because they wish to benefit from the pleasure they gain from this activity. There have already been several studies conducted in different developed nations which prove that there are serious psychological, as well as physical consequences for partaking in marijuana abuse on a regular basis. The legalization of marijuana would definitely cause more harm than has even been documented. One of the most convincing reasons why marijuana legalization should not be allowed is because it compromises the mental abilities of future generations. According to Hall and Degenhardt (2009), partaking in marijuana can actually result in interferences that affect the intellectual process. Users then begin to exhibit a pathological drowsiness that renders them unfit for ordinary everyday activities such as driving. The legalization of pot would also create a market for more portent forms of the drug to be formed. This is probably the most compelling reason why the recreational use of marijuana should not be legalized. This is already something that has taken place in many nations. According to Jager and Ramsey (2008), in many communities, there are more portent forms of marijuana that have been introduced among regular clients. For those who are not acquainted with the drug, less potent forms of it are offered to them at the start. Their dealers then introduce them gradually to more portent varieties of marijuana which are also more addictive. This will ensure that the dealers always have regular customers. Research There have been research studies done on the increasingly addictive content that exists in different kinds of marijuana. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Potency Monitoring (PM) program, which is a feature of the University of Mississippi’s National Center for Natural Products Research, has continuously conducted studies to evaluate the analytical potency Of different kinds of cannabis preparations in the nation. From samples of marijuana that were seized between 1993 and 2008, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Potency Monitoring (PM) program discovered that marijuana is constantly being improved. This means that the portions that are seized from different nations contain different elements that are meant to make the drug more addictive. According to Foti, Kotov, Guey and Bromet (2010) there are different types of herbal cannabis that have all had their content continuously improved to include more portent substances. Some of these varieties of marijuana include buds- in which female plants with flowering tops are used and kilo bricks- which contain compressed amounts of cannabis with packaging such as stems, leaves and seeds. According to Hawken (2010) it is the more potent varieties of marijuana that command the highest prices. Today’s society has grown to be much more liberal than was the case in the past. According to Hawken (2010) 15 million citizens in America regularly smoke marijuana. This means that more than 15% of the population regularly uses drugs. Libertarians have, in the past, argued that marijuana should be legalized because it does not have as bad effects on the human system as alcohol does- yet alcoholic products are not illegal. The reality, though, is that the idea of legalization of marijuana is not completely black and white. The advocates of legalization have claimed that the drug is not as harmful to the human system and public safety, as alcohol is. However, past studies do not second this assertion. According to a research documented by Wall, Poh, Cerda, Keyes, Galea and Hasin (2011) in 2009, nearly 15% of patients who were involved in accidents and had experienced shock-trauma had significantly high traces of marijuana in their bodies. In addition, 376,000 incidences that required emergency care in 2009 were tied to the recreational use of marijuana. The figures concerning the link between marijuana and crime were even more telling. According to Pletcher, Vittinghoff, Kalhan, Richman, Safford and Sidney (2012) roughly 60% of all arrests conducted in America in 2009 were linked with the abuse of drugs such as marijuana. This means that there is evidently a positive correlation between the use marijuana as a recreational drug and engaging in violent behavior. According to a study documented by Pletcher, Vittinghoff, Kalhan, Richman, Safford and Sidney (2012) postal workers who regularly smoke marijuana have approximately 55% more mishaps and 85% more spontaneous injuries than those who did not. Advocates for drug legalization have even claimed that the drug is not entirely addictive. According to Patton, Coffey, Carlin, Sawyer and Lynskey (2005) one in five young people who try to consume marijuana will inevitably become addicted to it. In addition, marijuana serves as a gateway drug that tempts to users to try more hardcore options such as cocaine. This is because the user cannot benefit from the same exotic high they may experience after they first use the drug on subsequent trials. The user will have to slowly increase his or her dosage in order to experience the same level of ‘high’. After some time, even the most concentrated forms of marijuana will not be enough to inspire the ‘high’ that the user may desire. This means that the user will be tempted to graduate to more hardcore substances such as cocaine in order to experience an even more startling feeling of euphoria. If the user keeps trying to improve the euphoric feeling by indulging in more and more drugs, he or she could easily overdose and suffer from reactions like coma and brain seizures. Even if a nation’s government allows for the depenalization of marijuana, it will inevitably experience a number of related consequences in its private sector. There are certain basic everyday functions that are curtailed by the recreational use of marijuana. For example, in many work organizations, employers do not wish to hire employees who regularly consume marijuana. Neither do they wish to conduct business with contractors and suppliers who regularly use it. To ensure that this stipulation is observed, many employers insist on their employees submitting to tests every so often. According to Wall, Poh, Cerda, Keyes, Galea and Hasin (2011), the views of employers have not even been affected by the decision of different states to legalize marijuana for legal, or even medical purposes. The employees who live in states that have legalized marijuana have not been permitted to use it while at work. Those who choose to contravene this stipulation are usually relieved of their jobs. The consumption of marijuana in such states is dangerous for employed people because marijuana is a substance that stays in human urine for almost a month. Another common claim of legalization advocates is that depenalizing the recreational use of the drug can save a government a lot of money. However, the fact is that if a society is no longer dissuaded from drug use by the negative effects that plague the lives of addicts, it will have to pay for the after effects of legalization laws. Some of these effects could include increased incidences of crashes caused by drugged driving, lower productivity that results from the sluggish effects of drug use among employees and subsequent treatment costs. According to Robert DuPont, who leads the Institute for Behavior and Health, legalizing a drug such as marijuana would mean that there would be no legal inhibition to discourage this risky behavior (Wall, Poh, Cerda, Keyes, Galea and Hasin, 2011). Advocates for the recreational use of marijuana have also claimed that the federal government could save the money that it commits to imprisoning users by simply legalizing the drug. The fact is that most of the people who are incarcerated after using the drug are imprisoned because of other misdemeanors that they commit while experiencing euphoric feelings, so, this is not a valid reason for decriminalizing the drug. There are also crimes that are committed in order to take advantage of the stipulation, in many states, that marijuana can only be used in cases where it is medically required. According to Sevigny and Caulkins (2004) the medical legalization of marijuana does not primarily benefit the individuals who most require it. It is a fact that in the states that permit the use of marijuana for medical purposes, it is the mostly those who do not have any medical ailments who are regular users. This means that the legalization of drugs for any purpose can result in some measure of dishonesty. Conclusion There are many individuals who feel that as free societies, America, as well as other developed nations, ought to allow their citizens to freely experiment with substances that may not be considered as being dangerous. Indeed the laws of free societies are based on the harm principle. This means that all citizens’ actions should not hurt others. Marijuana, though, is a substance that clearly harms other individuals. If it is legalized, there will be a considerable increase in other problems that are, at present, only linked with alcohol abuse. Essentially, freedom, in this case, will impinge on the freedom of others, who may have to pay for it in terms of healthcare expenses. Even though it is somewhat true to claim that there is some double standard involved when alcohol is allowed to remain legal while marijuana prohibited, it is negligent to use this as an excuse to conceal the truth in regards to the hazards of regular marijuana use. Even if advocates use philosophical arguments to stress on the importance of legalizing marijuana, there are serious problems that this process will effect on the general society that cannot be disregarded. Recommendations The fact is that the consumption of marijuana by patients who are terminally ill is no longer perceived as being a type of therapeutic intercession. This is because there are numerous other methods of easing pain symptoms which have been discovered in medical circles. However, these factors are rarely, if ever, directly mentioned in many medical circles. For example, physicians could use analgesic therapies, or even anti-emetic products to contain the levels of pain that are experienced by their clients. These are products that are as effective, if not more effective, than marijuana; and yet do not trigger the adverse side effects that are commonly associated with the use of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana is likely to result in the compromising of the ethical values of the coming generation, while also considerably damaging the resent society. If the national government is actually following a course in which it encourages its citizens to engage in self-destructive behaviors, or refuses to ban them, then it is up to individual citizens, themselves, to find ways of ensuring that their lives are not affected by such general rules. One way in which citizens can accomplish this is by ensuring that the next generation of Americans is not influenced to think that drug use is acceptable in any circumstances. One way to attain this is by ensuring that children participate in courses that underline the dangers of drugs. They can also be taught that normalizing the use of recreational marijuana will be the beginning of a slippery slope that is likely to end with them being incarcerated. If marijuana is decriminalized across the board, it will be particularly dangerous for impressionable children who may not have the mental abilities to weigh for themselves the pros and cons of drug use in any circumstance. This is why parents and teachers should strive to ensure that students are taught about the true effects of marijuana use on one’s life. Alternatively, citizens can lobby their lawmakers to keep marijuana illegal. However, in the light of the present push to legalize the drug, it is not likely that lawmakers will turn away from public opinion which, at present, is pushing for a different outcome. There would have to be a lot of pressure from different social institutions to force law makers to make responsible political changes. This means that those who oppose the legalization of marijuana have to make changes in their own lives through their own efforts, instead of depending on law makers. Another problem that has been created by the spate of legalizations across different states has to do with employment. The possession of marijuana is still illegal in America under federal law. The Controlled Substances Act, however, is somewhat restrained in states which have allowed citizens to be able to take advantage of medical marijuana. These include states such as Hawaii, Washington D.C., New Mexico and Colorado. In states such as California and Illinois, employers are openly encouraged to forbid the consumption of any marijuana products in their workforce, if they wish to. States such as Connecticut, Maine, Arizona, Delaware, Rhode Island and Michigan include explicit statements to the effect that the consumption of marijuana is strictly forbidden. The legalization of marijuana in places such as Colorado has actually created conflicts that many are unaware of how to solve. For example, there are employers that now insists on testing all prospective workers before employing them. These employers insist that workers avail themselves at random times that are chosen by the company executives so that they may be tested. This has caused considerable problems in states where citizens are allowed to consume marijuana for medical purposes, but employers are made to understand that they are not compelled to permit the consumption of marijuana among workers for any reason. In such states, marijuana is not perceived as being lawful because it is still perceived as being an illegal drug by the federal government. For employers, the decision not to allow employees to partake in marijuana is based on safety, as well as public health reasons. When workers take part in daily responsibilities while under the influence of drugs, they are more likely to commit serious mistakes due to slowed thinking processes, as well as the existence of slow reactive times. The fact that this issue has to be addressed is a signal of how far society has lost its moral compass. Essentially, what is supposed to be viewed as a normal law is now being challenged in actual courts. Employers who do not take radical steps to protect themselves from charges filed by angry, or vengeful employees are likely to be forced to reconsider their rules in favour of permitting the consumption of marijuana. One way in which employers can avoid such a scenario is by creating laws that all potential workers are compelled to read upon joining the organization. Essentially, employers cannot be compelled to meet the needs of workers in as far as the smoking of marijuana is concerned. Employers could easily state that four supreme courts in different states, as well as the federal court, have ruled in favor of employers upholding workplaces that are drug free. Employers could also push for the creation of laws that support the existence of drug free workplaces. This could be accomplished through organizations which represent the needs of employers across different sectors. Another way in which state citizens such as law enforcement authorities can fight the legalization of marijuana is by appealing to the existing authorities while providing actual facts. The police officers in every state are the ones who have to deal with intoxicated citizens who may have consumed marijuana. They are, therefore, in the best position to provide facts that show how marijuana possession can destroy the fabric of a society. They could also point out the existence of factors that have, in the recent past, began to materialize because of state laws to legalize marijuana. For example, the national government does not have the ability to order local enforcement authorities to implement the federal prohibition on drugs like marijuana. This means that the federal government’s federal policy could easily backfire, thereby giving rise to a state of affairs in which the states are unable to regulate the use of marijuana, even as the federal authorities are powerless to make total prohibition compulsory. This then generates a situation of anarchy that can easily be taken advantage of by criminal elements. This will then force both the federal as well as state governments to revise their basic understanding of the laws that seek to legalize drugs such as marijuana. References Budney, A. J., Vandrey, R. G., Hughes, J. R., Thostenson, J. D., & Bursac, Z. (2008). Comparison of cannabis and tobacco withdrawal: Severity and contribution to relapse. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 35(4), 362-368. Caulkins, J. P., & Sevigny, E. (2005). How many people does the U.S. incarcerate for drug use and who are they? Contemporary Drug Problems, 32(3), 405–428. Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Ridder, E. M. (2005). Tests of causal linkages between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms. Addiction, 100(3), 354-366. Foti, D. J., Kotov, R., Guey, L. T., & Bromet, E. J. (2010). Cannabis use and the course of schizophrenia: 10-year follow up after first hospitalization. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 167(8), 987-93. Hall, W., & Degenhardt, L. (2009). Adverse health effects of non-medical cannabis use. The Lancet, 374(9698), 1383-1391. Hawken, A. (2010). Behavioral triage: A new model for identifying and treating substance abusing offenders. Journal of Drug Policy Analysis, 3(1), 1-5. Jager, G., & Ramsey, N. F. (2008). Long-term consequences of adolescent cannabis exposure on the development of cognition, brain structure and function: An overview of animal and human research. Current Drug Abuse Reviews, 1(2), 114-123. Li, M., Brandy, J. E., DiMaggio, C. J., Lusardi, A. R., Tzong, K. Y., & Li, G. (2012). Marijuana use and motor vehicle crash. Epidemiological Reviews, 175(2), 89-90. Patton, G. C., Coffey, C., Carlin, J. B., Sawyer, S. M., & Lynskey, M. (2005). Reverse gateways? Frequent cannabis use as a predictor of tobacco initiation and nicotine dependence. Addiction, 100(10), 1518-1525. Pletcher, M. J., Vittinghoff, E., Kalhan, R., Richman, J., Safford, M., & Sidney, S. (2012). Association between marijuana exposure and pulmonary function over 20 years. Journal of the American Medical Association, 307(2),173-181. Room, R., Fischer, B., Hall, W., Lenton, S., & Reuter, P. (2010). Marijuana Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Saitz. (Eds.) Principles of Addiction Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & WIlkins. Sevigny, E., & Caulkins, J. P. (2004). Kingpins or mules? An analysis of drug offenders incarcerated in federal and state prisons. Criminology and Public Policy, 3(3), 401–434. Wall, M. M., Poh, E., Cerda, M., Keyes, K., Galea, S., & Hasin, D. S. (2011). Adolescent marijuana use from 2002 to 2008: Higher in states with medical marijuana laws, cause still unclear. Annals of Epidemiology, 21(9), 714-716, Welch, S. P. (2009). The pharmacology of cannabinoids. In D. A. Fiellin, S. C. Miller & R. Read More