Legalizing Weed Issues - Essay Example

Legalizing Weed Debate on legalization of marijuana has intensified in recent years with support for decriminalization gaining momentum. According to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center, support for decriminalization of marijuana had increased from 41 percent to 52 percent since 2010 among adults in the US. Support for decriminalization has also taken a non-partisan angle with people from diverse political and demographic groups sounding their support. The Pew Research Center study also notes there had been an increase in the number of Americans who admitted to using marijuana in the past with the figure standing at 48 percent compared to 38 percent a decade ago. Sacco and Finklea note the status of marijuana claiming it is “the most commonly used illicit drug across the world” with about 18.9 million people in the US from age 12 and above admitting using marijuana in the past month (1). It is therefore apparent that criminalization of marijuana has not discouraged use given the increased number of people admitting usage. Based on the ongoing trend the discussion has been whether marijuana use should be legalized since criminalization has not resulted in a reduction in usage. In view of the changing public perceptions on marijuana use and possession this assay argues that smoking marijuana should be made legal for adults especially due to the potential benefits that such a move might have on the individual’s health, a country’s economy and reduction in usage of alcohol and hard drugs. The shift in public towards acceptance of marijuana use has also come with a number of states in the US legalizing the use especially for medical purposes. Among these states are Washington and Colorado which have legalized the use and possession of marijuana while twenty other states limited its legality to medical use leading to the opinion that more sates should also follow the same route and that the federal government will also follow with repealing other draconian laws that have criminalized marijuana use. This is especially so when compared with laws prohibiting alcohol consumption where the federal government tried to stop consumption of alcohol for fourteen years but failed. The law prohibiting marijuana use has achieved the same result as that prohibiting alcohol consumption the only difference being laws prohibiting marijuana have been in effect for a longer period. However, Duke warns that increased public opinion in support of marijuana use does not mean there will be a move by the federal government to legalize use and possession given the same trend in the 1970s where increased public acceptance was followed by implementation of harsher penalties for those convicted of use and possession of marijuana. Laws prohibiting possession and use of marijuana are bound to fail considering the ease of cultivation with the plant needing minimal to no horticultural expertise (Kristof). It can also grow indoors and with small financial investment therefore making it difficult for the government to regulate its cultivation (Duke 1315). The concern over legalization of marijuana is motivated by the apprehension of the possible outcomes which many fear might be detrimental to society. Opposition to decriminalization of marijuana is therefore based on what people think might be the result of such policy move. It is thought that decriminalization will result in a wrong impression about its effects as many will think it is because it has no risks. Opponents of decriminalization argue this will result in a change of attitude and beliefs about the drug leading to prevalence of use with undesirable consequences of use also rising. Roffman argues the rise in usage will be as a result of breaking barriers to drug use which includes the anti-drug attitudes and the stigma associated with marijuana use due to the drug being an illegal substance (1). The author notes the negative attitude some people have against marijuana as an illegal substance has protected them from using which is the reason for low usage. The increased usage of marijuana due to decriminalization can also be attributed to what opponents of such policy see as teenagers secretly getting access to their parents’ or older friends’ supply and from illegal points of access due to diversion from legal sources. It is also feared that decriminalization will result in push for more control of the market and advertisement by entrepreneurs. Since decriminalization is bound to create a new market, the profits will motivate entrepreneurs to call for relaxation of laws limiting sale of high potency marijuana that has higher heath risks, advertising, labeling and laws limiting outlets and their concentration in an areas. Opposition to the use and possession of marijuana has also been as a result of a number of studies which have indicated a number of negative outcomes it has on the health of users. Among the negative effects that marijuana has been associated with include respiratory complications. Smoking marijuana has been associated with the complications that tobacco smokers have including reduced pulmonary functioning, leads to chronic coughs and inflammation of the airway and growth of abnormal cells which might lead to cancer. However, the authors note research on whether marijuana smokers face increased risk of cancer than tobacco smokers has been inconclusive (Svrakic, Lustman, Mallya, Lynn, Finney and Svrakic 93). These effects of marijuana smoking are in addition to others especially those related to the functioning of the brain. The negative mental effects of smoking marijuana include sluggishness in brain activities, being weary, restless and other effects such as euphoria and paranoia. There are also immediate negative effects of smoking marijuana that last for short spells especially in the user’s performance and cognition with long-term negative effects including some level of impairments to some higher cognitive functioning such as on ability to focus attention and filtering out irrelevant information. However, these results have been found to be prevalent in adult users who began smoking marijuana in teenage years especially when involved in excessive smoking. Additionally many of the studies that have shown the negative effects of smoking marijuana have also accepted the medical benefit that it possesses (Svrakic et al 93). Even as the objections to decriminalization of use and possession of marijuana still remains such views come from those who fear the negative outcomes, there are also indications that these apprehension is not necessarily based on outcomes from research or evidence from countries that have already implemented a number of policies that decriminalize marijuana use (Fisher 20). Among the fears that policy makers have is the effect of decriminalization on consumption levels. It is feared that making marijuana legal will increase access therefore resulting in widespread usage especially among the teenagers and young people. However, existing evidence from countries that have legalized usage portrays contrary results. Legalization of marijuana in a number of countries has shown that it can reduce drug use and petty crime rates therefore dispelling fears of increased usage. Decriminalization of use and possession of small scale marijuana in Portugal has seen teenage drug use decline while in Netherlands decriminalization has not led to dramatic increase in usage which is still at 5 percent compared to 12 percent in US at the same period. Therefore, evidence from countries such as Portugal and Netherlands which have already decriminalize marijuana use and possession of small amounts by adults shows that decriminalization does not necessarily lead to increased use and possession. This is because decriminalization can be accompanied by other regulatory frameworks that will limit access to special points such as cafes and clinics and usage by adults (Adler, Peter, and O’Brien 381). Even in cases where there has been an increase in usage, Hughes and Stevens attribute this to the tendency of drug users to shift usage from other hard drugs such as heroin to marijuana. This according to Hughes and Stevens is a positive outcome since marijuana has less threatening drug related health complications compared to heroin (5). Duke also notes decriminalization while also allowing the sale of low potency of marijuana would reduce alcohol intake as studies had shown those who take marijuana reduce intake of alcohol, which according to the author is more harmful than the regulated marijuana (1315). Given the effect marijuana might have on usage of alcohol and other hard drugs such as heroin, it is only rational it should be decriminalized to reduce their usage. Many people have died very year due to alcohol poisoning and overdose of drugs such as heroin while there is no evidence of death from overdose on marijuana. Tobacco is another drug that has far reaching consequences on human health yet it is legal to smoke tobacco and not marijuana. Tobacco has been found to be more harmful to human health compared to marijuana due to being linked to diseases such as cancer of the throat. Such negative effects of other drugs, alcohol and tobacco make a case for the decriminalization of marijuana especially based on the fact that marijuana use leads to a decrease in usage of other drugs and alcohol while its effects on health are not as harmful. There have been arguments that marijuana serves as a gateway for other drugs with the youth who start off smocking pot graduating to harder drugs such as cocaine and heroin (Svrakic, Lustman, Mallya, Lynn, Finney and Svrakic 94; Morgan 68). This argument is based on the fact that most people using drugs such cocaine and heroin where initiated into them via marijuana while many also combine them. However, the relation that marijuana has with hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine is that they are in most cases supplied by same individuals. These hard drugs generally cost more than marijuana, which makes their sale a priority to the suppliers. Consequently, the suppliers will want to entice their customers to try heroin and cocaine since to them it makes business sense to sale a commodity with higher returns that one whose profits is lower. Many of the youths who start off smoking marijuana then end up with other drugs such as heroin and cocaine are therefore influenced by those who supply the drugs. Decriminalization will result in regulation of outlet points to ensure they comply with potency and the type of drugs that should be sold therefore, cutting off access to hard drugs that are provided by suppliers. Access will also be limited to those who meet minimum requirement in terms of legal age to buy or use marijuana. This is not the case in the current situation where apart from peddling illegal drugs, suppliers do not care about the age of their clients only focusing on the financial benefits of selling to a wider group of individuals. A further, positive outcome of decriminalization of marijuana in some countries is the effect it has on the decision to seek help for those facing addition problems. Szalavitz notes that since decriminalization of marijuana in Portugal, the number of people seeking help in rehabilitation centers has been on the increase. This is because people no longer have to hide the problem for fear of being reprimanded for using an illegal substance. Decriminalization seems to have a positive effect on people decision to seek medical help. Hughes and Stevens support this outcome noting that due to decriminalization in Portugal, the number of people visit the Commissions for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction (CDTs) has been on the rise since 2001. The CDTs are specially designed referral agencies that handle issues related to addiction from marijuana and have been effective in dealing with such cases as opposed to the past system where most of those caught for possession or usage would be handled by the penal system. Decriminalization of marijuana use and substituting the penal laws on use and possession of small scale by adults with such system as the CDTs in Portugal appears to be more efficient in dealing with addition than the current approach employed by most of the states in the US where people are sentenced without being rehabilitated. The effect of such practices where people are punished by imprisonment is that the high rate of recidivism as those addicted to marijuana are most likely to go back to their habits after serving their sentences (Hughes and Stevens 5). Criminalization of marijuana use and possession does not have a positive effect on the country’s economic state given the high costs involved in the arrest, prosecuting, and imprisoning of individuals for marijuana related offenses. It is estimated that the costs involved in arresting individuals for marijuana possession is between 60 and 100 million dollars every year in New York alone. The average cost for the whole of US stands at 8 billion dollars annually which could be higher when other factors are such as increased crime are factored into the fight against marijuana possession and usage (Duke 1313). Legalizing possession in small scale and usage by adults will lead to regulations will release the available law enforcement resources to investigate other dangerous criminal activities while also saving the amount of revenue needed to police possession and usage. Apart from saving expenditure on law enforcement, legalizing marijuana has a further economic value from the taxes imposed on trade involving its usage or cultivation. Duke notes removal of prohibition will result in collection of proximally six billion dollars as taxes from sale of marijuana (1313). Legalizing and regulating marijuana is an effective way of ensuring it becomes a cash crop that benefit the country’s economy instead of turning underground suppliers and those who produce into millionaires. The collected revenue could be of more use to both the states and federal governments as it could go towards funding productive measures such as education on drug use and offering rehabilitation to drug addicts. Education and rehabilitation services that will be funded through taxation of marijuana will contribute to overall reduction in drug use including hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin. Duke adds that since production of marijuana is not costly, taxation will not necessarily have a negative effect on price since users could get it at approximately the same price as it was before removal of prohibition (1315). However, the author warns that taxation which results in a dramatic increase in prices might be detrimental to the achievement of set objectives due to reintroduction of black-markets. From the foregoing discussion, opposition to the idea of making marijuana legal has been based on the fear of the negative outcomes that such a move might have on the population. There has been apprehension that removing prohibition of marijuana will result in negative effects such as acting as a gateway for the youth to begin usage of hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin. There are also concerns that smoking marijuana might result in other health complications such as those found in tobacco, alcohol and hard drugs such cocaine and heroin. However, there are evidence to show that negative effects of using marijuana are less harmful than those found in other drugs and alcohol. Further, using marijuana leads to a decrease in usage of other drugs and alcohol leading to the argument that smoking marijuana should be legalized as a means to reducing other drug use including alcohol. There is also a benefit to the country’s economy when use and possession of marijuana by adults is decriminalized. This is because both the state and federal governments will then have a source of revenue through taxation while the law enforcement will assigned to deal with other criminal offences. Based on the above reasons, both the state and federal governments should initiate legislative polices to decriminalize and regulate marijuana use and possession of small qualities by adults while also ensuring it is supplied from predetermined outlets. Works Cited “Majority Now Supports Legalizing Marijuana”. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 2014. Web. 05 May 2014. < http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/04/majority-now-supports-legalizing-marijuana/> Adler, Patricia A., Peter Adler, and Patrick K. OBrien, eds. Drugs and the American Dream: An Anthology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Print. Duke, Steven B. "The Future of Marijuana in the United States." Or. L. Rev. 91 (2013): 1301-1337. Print. Fisher, Gary L. Rethinking our war on drugs: Candid talk about controversial issues. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006. Print. Hughes, Caitlin, and Alex Stevens. The effects of the decriminalization of drug use in Portugal. Beckley: The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, 2007. Kristof, Nicholas D. “End the War on Pot. The opinion pages”. The New York Times, 27 October 2010. Web. 05 May 2014. Morgan, Kayla. Legalizing Marijuana. Edina, Minnesota: ABDO Publishing Company, 2010. Print. Roffman, Roger Alan. "Legalization of Marijuana: Unraveling Quandaries for the Addiction Professional." Frontiers in Psychiatry, 4 (2013): 50.1-3. Print. Sacco, Lisa N., and Kristin Finklea. State Marijuana Legalization Initiatives: Implications for Federal Law Enforcement. Washington: Congressional Research Service 2013. Print. Svrakic, Dragan, Patrick J. Lustman, Ashok Mallya, Taylor Andrea Lynn, Rhonda Finney and Neda M. Svrakic. Legalization, decriminalization and medicinal use of cannabis: a scientific and public health perspective. Missouri Medicine, 109:2 (2012), 90-98. Print. Szalavitz, Maia. “Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?” Time.com. Time, 26 Apr. 2009. Web. 05 May 2014. Read More