Why We Should Not Legalize Marijuana - Research Paper Example

Task: Why we should not legalize marijuana The recent unprecedented decision by the s of Colorado and Washington to approve the legality of recreational consumption of marijuana heightened the debate on whether to legalize the drug or keep it banned. Experts in policy formulation and impacts of selected policy issues on the society continue to present divergent opinions concerning the marijuana legalization debate. Despite the two states’ decision, the federal government still maintains its stern position that smoking marijuana remains outlawed across the various states. This creates a serious conflict between the federal government and states that allow recreational use of marijuana. In response, the federal government holds high profile meetings relating to the decision (Savage 1). Besides the conflict, there are a number of problems likely to emerge when states continue to pass legislations that allow marijuana use. With the growing influence from lobby groups in support of marijuana legalization, as predicted by opinion poll results, public education is vital. The public needs to understand the reasons why the drug should remain illegal before going to polls. In as much as marijuana legalization proponents present a picture of a safe society that freely smokes, there are credible reasons to outlaw the drug and impede efforts to legalize its use. Supporters of the legalization of marijuana foresee their supporters smoking freely after uplifting laws that ban marijuana while they assume that the federal government shall remain strict on drug. This presents the challenge of a conflict that states shall experience regarding their contradictory laws and policies on the use of marijuana. There is a serious need for coordination between federal and state governments to evade differences as those experienced in keeping law and order. Ultimately, the citizens are borne to bear the consequences of such contradicting laws. It is noteworthy that citizens are the proponents of regulations and policies that are most likely to affect them. Court rulings on cases involving marijuana trade and possession shall differ, for instance. This places the justice to the citizens at stake and considerable challenge to the society. Since the federal courts have the final say over state courts, marijuana laws shall remain illegal despite its legalization by some states. Eric Holder, the American Attorney General, is on record reiterating that the federal government will launch relentless efforts to prosecute anyone who demeans the law by using Marijuana, in the country. This was his office’s response with reference to prior pressures from lobby groups from California to legalize the drug. Although the pledge failed to pass through, the attorney’s office maintains its position on marijuana use. A further proof of the possibility of conflict between the federal and state agents is the recent rejection by the anti-drug authorities from the federal government to mediate with their counterparts from Oregon. This saw the failure of the two authorities to agree over the proposal to uplift prohibition of marijuana in the state. In an attempt to avoid the conflict between federal and state agents, marijuana should remain illegal. In addition, there are little possibilities that federal agents shall intercede with their fellows from states. The best way to avoid the confusion is to keep marijuana outlawed. Legalizing marijuana will bring related psychological effects to smokers in the society. Amendment sixty-four advocated for the use of the drug after a restricted age of twenty-one. It hints out the use of the drug only for the purpose of recreation. This creates the question of the possibilities of psychological implications that may emanate from smoking marijuana for recreational purposes. It is doubtless that with legalized use, the increase in the number of marijuana users in the society is high. In addition, there will be a plausible rise in access to the drug given the widespread acceptance of its sales and distribution. This supports the concept that a considerable portion of the population will stay under the influence of marijuana for long hours. The effect of drugs in creating a lazy society is certain and a proven idea. The states of Colorado and Washington, therefore, must prepare to tolerate a lazy population that is under the influence of drugs for most hours, each day. This creates the concern over the psychological effects of marijuana legalization. Smoking marijuana initiates influential psychological problem in any society that legalizes it. To avoid the occurrence of such psychological effects including a lazy society, marijuana should remain illegal. A lazy population can realize modest development and progress. Any government dedicated to ensuring the development and progress should keep the intake of drugs with psychological effects in check. Keeping marijuana smoking unlawful shall solve challenges of a possible increase in the number of people with psychological effects as memory lapse. States that plan to legalize smoking of the drug should prepare a responsive anti-drug authority to undertake public awareness campaigns to discourage excessive use of substances. It is noteworthy that a considerable section of the public has a low level of knowledge on the effects of marijuana on health. Anti-drug authorities require massive financing and allocation of funds from the states. Campaigns to inform the public on the effects of drugs are equally expensive to finance. These, besides other financial implications, are inevitable consequences of passing pro-drug policies by states. While legalization proponents are conscious of the financial implications of pro-drug policies, being expensive and burdening to the annual budget, they point at advocating for the rights of the people. Legalization proponents, instead, should advocate for a compensation of resources used in awareness campaigns against overuse of drugs into addressing other challenges as insecurity. To evade the problem of wastage of resources on drug awareness campaigns that are likely to increase with legalization, marijuana use should be unlawful. Such resources, therefore, can be better useful to address pressing concerns in society than for drug awareness campaigns that emanate from legalization. The health implications of marijuana smoking are extensive and proven by scientists, through research in the fields of medicine and drugs. The amount of federal and state revenues spent in therapy and treatment of marijuana-related health implications increase considerably, every year. Smoking of the drug has serious effects on the functioning of the brain. This emanates from its chemical components that have adverse effects on neurons of the brain. When recreational use of marijuana turns to be a lawful act, there is a high likelihood that the act will turn habitual among a significant number of smokers. Habitual use initiates high damage to the brain neurons compared to restricted use. Legalized use, therefore, translates to an increase in the number of people who suffer from brain problems of smoking. Subsequently, federal and states’ allocation on treatment of smoking-induced health cases will increase considerably. The allocation may further increase with the increase of the number of citizens experiencing psychotic illnesses. Attention deficit, a common condition among marijuana smokers is most likely to spread in the society with legalized recreational use of the drug. To prevent such complications, legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes should not form any policy provision. Any lobby group that claims to advocate for freedom of citizens should be considerate of the health of the citizens, as well. This renders the claims of legalization proponents as rights advocates questionable and subject to critique. With the already existing high dependence on marijuana among citizens and a high toll of people suffering from its health effects, proponents cite freedom as the reason for their pledge. Ultimately, this is a reverse of the freedom that marijuana smokers need; freedom from illnesses from marijuana smoking. Drug violence in the United States remains to be among the most challenging roles to the criminal justice system. The complexity of the issue emanates from the involvement of high profile political class and their massive influence in the system. It is a proven fact that trade in drugs, in America, always involves the influence of reputable public figures and individuals. The fight against marijuana possession in the country is no difference. Top businesspersons and political elites have serious indulgence in the trade of the drug. Criminal organizations that enjoy deep networks across the country are always behind the supply of the drug. Proponents of marijuana legalization propose that it will help curb the challenge of drugs in the country. This, however, has little to contribute to drug violence. Claims that marijuana sales are prime source of revenue for criminal organizations are based on unproven premises. Human trafficking is a serious atrocity conducted by criminal groups in the country that has a significant contribution as a source of revenue for the criminal organizations. In addition, legalized recreational use of marijuana shall increase the spread of criminal organizations since financing such organizations shall be easy from drug trades. The states of Colorado and Washington must prepare to face the challenge of increase in the spread of criminal organizations. With existing laws that prohibit marijuana, criminal organizations are operating drug cartels. Legalization would further stabilize the cartels more than they are today. To avoid such security threats, marijuana should remain outlawed. Allowing the public to use any drug poses a burden to the law enforcement organizations in the country. Legalizing marijuana will overburden the criminal justice system that already faces a number of challenges as terrorism threats. Federal and state governments need to recruit additional agents to monitor the probable increase in criminal activities that come with marijuana legalization. The system already faces the challenge of the burden of the cost of supporting prisoners convicted with marijuana related crimes. Since proponents propose controlled use of the drug, they are not leaving if freely accepted. This creates an increase in the number of cases of violations of set regulations. Marijuana should remain illegal to avoid the problem of overburdening the criminal justice system that already faces challenges. The social cost of drugs in the society is alarmingly high. The expenditure on addressing social problems caused by alcohol consumption is on the increase. The number of people suffering from chronic illnesses that come with the use of tobacco is equally in the rise, annually. Tobacco and alcohol are legal. Legalizing marijuana translates to an escalation of the number of people who will most probably suffer from lung and other forms of cancer. Consequently, the social cost of drugs in the society is borne to increase, in addition to, the existing high social cost from tobacco and alcohol legalization. Lobby groups in support of legalization often point at taxation of marijuana as a significant source of revenue. Their opinions are right since there is a high probability that consumers will increase in number, upon legalization. However, it is evident that the social cost of legalization supersedes the amount of revenue that is likely to arise from taxation of the drug. Smoking is a leading cause of cancer. The cost of health care for cancer patients is exceedingly high, for instance. The amount of resources allocated, by federal and state governments, in addressing cancer problems is massive. This amount is most likely to escalate with the approval of the consumption of cancer-causing drugs in the society. Notably the revenue collected from taxation is insufficient to incur the cost of health care incurred from the increase in illnesses caused by the drugs. Keeping the drug outlawed is vital to bring down the high social cost that will occur from legalization. There is a high possibility that marijuana legalization will cause deaths from road accidents. The debate on legalization is always a subject to a number of misperceptions that the public does not judge with the best of their knowledge. Smoking by drivers is a leading cause of accidents (Hanson, Venturelli and Fleckenstein 414), for instance. Controlling marijuana use among drivers, for instance, is a proposal by legalization proponents that is tantamount to misperception. Despite marijuana being illegal, the number of accidents reported by law enforcement officials that occur because of the influence of the drug is high. It is even a misconception that when laws that ban the use of the drug are uplifted, control of drivers is a possibility. Further, it is a serious deceit to the public that control of drivers’ use of the drug, a society where it is legal, is a solution to control accidents from marijuana use. Proposals by lobby groups those controlling the use of the drug after legalization by drivers are misguided. Instead, legalizing marijuana puts the public at the risk of the high number of accidents. Any organization or body that pledges to protect the freedom of the society would not, by the mere thought and reason, advocate for policies that are most likely to cause deaths. Proponents of legalization, therefore, should revise their proposals before presenting them to the public. It is exceptionally pertinent to ensure the public get detailed information before deciding on policy considerations that allow drug use. Advocates for pro-marijuana policies point at the legalization of alcohol while relating it to marijuana. In their opinion, marijuana does not initiate serious challenges as alcohol (Caulkins et al. 6). The initiated relationship between marijuana and alcohol is a misperception and bears little grounds and scientific proofs. While alcohol has ethanol as the main component, marijuana has a number of unsafe chemicals contained in it. This put the health of smokers at risk compared to consumers of alcohol. Legalizing marijuana, therefore, would translate to a number of people experiencing social effects from the consumption of the drug compared to alcohol consumers. The public and eternity of voters, who bear the say in the passing or refusal of pro-drug laws, have the challenge to choose the best way forward that determines the fate of their health status. Marijuana use initiates lifetime effects on young people. THC, a chemical substance contained in marijuana is a fatal destroying chemical of the brain cells (Kalat 75). Young people have little perception of the effects of drugs on their health. As such, they overindulge and abuse fatal drugs as marijuana. A significant number of teenagers smoke marijuana despite its illegality (White and Rabiner 68). Such teenagers struggle with the effect of addiction that has effects on moral conduct and their behavior, as well. There is a high probability that such effects are prone to continue over the lifetime of young people in the society. Passing laws that allow the use of the drug is an equivalence of rendering the youth destroyed. The states of Washington and Colorado need to prepare for a generation that is under the influence of drug addiction, idle and irresponsible. This is what entails approving marijuana use for the youthful generation in any society. To avoid the predicted confusion in the lives of youths, the drug should remain outlawed. Since the move by the two states to approve the use of the drug, there have emerged diverse opinions on the issue (Healy 1). More lobby groups are emerging to advocate for the barn of prohibition of marijuana use than there were before. It, however, remains a serious concern that the public are prone to propaganda and misconceptions to approve policies that may not go well with the next generation’s right to a healthy and moral life. The public, therefore, should understand that there are more reasons to keep the drug illegal than there are to approve of its use. Works Cited Caulkins, Jonathan., Angela, Hawken., Beau, Kilmer., and Mark, Kleiman. Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print. Hanson, Glen., Venturelli, Peter., and Fleckenstein, Annette. Drugs and Society. Boston, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2011. Print. Healy, Jack. Voters Ease Marijuana Laws in 2 States, but Legal Questions Remain. The New York Times. November 7, 2012. Web. January 22, 2013. Kalat, James. Biological Psychology. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2012. Print. Savage, Charlie. Administration Weighs Legal Action Against States That Legalized Marijuana Use. The New York Times. December 6, 2012. Web. January 22, 2013. White, Helene and Rabiner, David. College Drinking and Drug Use. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 2011. Print. Read More