Social Effects of Legalizing Marijuana - Research Paper Example

of Topic: Legalizing Marijuana Introduction The long-held view that marijuana is harmful to society is supported with evidence and the existing policy should not be reversed just to serve some interested individuals or groups with their unsupported claims while wreaking greater havoc to society. This paper discusses and analysis facts and claims against the legalization of marijuana by pointing out the social effects, health effects and economic effects. The continued prohibition on the use and production of marijuana is still the best course of action for the United States by looking at the strength of the arguments and their supporting pieces of evidence. A number of possible arguments for its legalization are also refuted in support of the actual and feared social, health and economic effects. 2.1 Social Effects of legalizing marijuana The more immediate social effect of legalization marijuana production and use would be the higher chances for more crimes which could really have its related health and economic effects. If sins are the enemies of heaven, crimes are the enemies of a just and peaceful society. Thus legalizing the marijuana would have the effect of increasing the number of drug-related crimes. It is argued by those who favour legalization of the marijuana argues that the use and production domestically were not addressed by long practice of prohibiting the same. It is claimed by some supporters that despite the use of criminal penalties to prevent the use of hemp or marijuana for three quarters of a century, there still existed millions of users, which to them should be considered an evidence of such failure of prohibiting its free use and production (“420 Campaign – Top Ten Reasons Marijuana Should Be Legal”). Said claim essentially rested on the premise that people will not fear what is beneficial even in the eyes of threat of imprisonment. The validity of the above claims by the supporter of legalization become doubtful when the fallacy of the claim is exposes. The continued number of users via illegal means cannot be evidence of its failure since choosing to violate existing laws is still part of human. The fact that the substance is being used by a number people despite its being prohibited does not mean that prohibiting the same has become less effective. On the other hand, claims of success for such prohibition can be supported with crimes continued to be drug-related. It could therefore be countered that had there been no prohibition on the use and production of marijuana the greater would have been the number of crimes and therefore social effects would have been worse. There The basis for the feared increase in crimes would include the possible effects on kids who would have freer access to marijuana if legalization of its use and production would happen. Legalization of marijuana would make it appear that as if marijuana can now be bought as pack of cigarettes and one could just imagine how the life of the kids would be affected in the process. The kids or the minors do not have the capacity to reason it out as adults do about the danger of things that are just made available or accessible to them. This would be allowing them to experiment with marijuana and society would be surprised to learn that its children or younger people have become addicts and criminals. This is dangerous in the light of the finding that the increase in marijuana was seen in the “measurable decrease in the proportion of young people who perceive marijuana a dangerous substance. (McCollum, 156). Children could be duped into wrongly believing that marijuana is doing something good for health but in reality they could be using marijuana to deaden of their senses to be guilt-free temporarily while they are under the influenced of drugs. Prohibiting the sale of cigarette kids and yet they could have some other reasons why they have in their possession cigarette and they could actually smoke without the knowledge or consent of their parent. A worse scenario could be happen when marijuana could just be treated just like tobacco or cigarettes. Kids are not equipped sufficient mental reasoning in order to be fully responsible for their choices. Making them more prone to wrong choices by making access easier to previously prohibited ones would be an act of suicide for the society. The preservation of status quo of not legalizing marijuana would just continue what has been legal and constitutional for a long-time. This is in complete opposite of the claim that the implementation of marijuana laws was shown as discriminatory against the blacks and Hispanics. There is therefore no basis for the claim that the law on prohibiting use and production of marijuana was not for everybody but for he prejudice of the minorities. Supporters for legalization claim that statistics can show that the African-Americans constitute about 13% of the total population of the US, with 13.5% of the annual marijuana users from this group while accounting for 26% percent of the total marijuana-related arrests (“420 Campaign”). This claim may not be necessarily resting on solid grounds if indeed there are more non-white users that white users. The fact that white persons are still arrested for drug violations can be considered a fair implementation of the law. That marijuana use is simply more deadly that tobacco or alcohol use in terms of resulting behaviour of users should uphold continued prohibition. It is argued that marijuana is not deadly drug and one who use must feel safer than when the same person uses alcohol. In claiming that marijuana was also not toxic to human being, proponents argued that one may get overdose in some drugs or even in alcohol but it is almost impossible with the use of marijuana. Thus proponents came with unproven claim that marijuana is less addictive than alcohol or tobacco making it unfair to treat more cruelly users of marijuana than alcohol or tobacco users (“420 Campaign”. To disprove such claims, it can be asserted that comparing marijuana to tobacco on the possible effects to the behaviour of the takers is simply faulty. It would really be surprising if not shocking news to hear that a person under the influence of using tobacco has committed a heinous from by raping a girl. To compare the influence of marijuana and alcohol on their effects of users may sound more rational in determining of which would cause more dangerous behaviour on users. It may be further countered that it would more easily to young ones to smoke marijuana than to drink liquors. Thus legalization would be increasing the danger to society in terms of what users could inflict on helpless victims. The more dangerous picture for society could be more dramatic when marijuana use is viewed in the context of other prohibited drugs. Thus another argument against legalization is the claim that marijuana is often used as a bridge drug that would eventually lead to harder drugs such heroin, cocaine and others. These claimed result of studies showing marijuana as initial door for more dangerous and harder drugs (Messerli). By experimenting with what is often thought as a “harmless" drug, users would be eventually looking for for higher or bigger kind like heroin to sustain their addiction. Any move or act therefore that would legalized marijuana production and use, can be viewed as an act to encourage these users to become eventual drug dependents and drug addicts. It would be a government creating what it would solving when the latter ill find itself to have aggravated drug-related crimes. Why not rip the bud as early as possible? Why not deny any chance that would put the life of many especially the kids at risk? Many governments have been prohibiting use and production of marijuana, why the sudden turnaround? Another social effect is resulting more legal and court problems arising from more drug-related driving accidents that would come with legalization. If a drunk driving cannot be controlled despite the massive education and penalties impose, the effects could be worse if driver could just use marijuana. Drivers could be "driving high” and would make fearless of accidents that may happen since drugs have the tendency to remove inhibition. Moreover, they could not be detected by the police or traffic enforcers unless there is someone smoking inside a car (Messerli). 2.2. The Health Effects Marijuana legalization is claimed based on the medical or medicinal use as a ground (“Why Marijuana Should Be Legal”). In the absence of any scientific basis, the argument that marijuana does not have any legitimate or therapeutic benefits appears more convincing. Opinions by some who may have wrongly associated relief from pains in using marijuana are simply not equivalent to scientific proof. By basing opinions about medical marijuana on personal accounts instead of medical science, the same essentially create stories from these “harmful myths about medical marijuana” (Morgan 48). In providing proof that medical use are not well-founded with scientific evidence Dr. Mark L. Kraus of the Connecticut Chapter of the American Society of Addition Medicine said: "smokable marijuana has not passed the rigorous scrutiny of scientific investigation and has not been found safe and effective in treating pain, nausea and vomiting or wasting syndrome." (Morgan 48). Damage to the lungs from smoking is claimed as the most important long-term physical effect of marijuana. Along with it are related lung ailments included bronchitis, asthma, and emphysema. Smoking cigarette causes lung cancer and smoking marijuana could not be far from producing the same or even worse lung ailments. The serious health risks than come with legalization are not devoid of evidence (Morgan 48). While it may be argued by those who support legalization that marijuana does not have used by smoking to be effective as the same can be baked into food can be brewed with hot water as in making a tea or simply breathed in as vapor. The line of the argument is that risk from smoking is decided by the user from the power of choice (Morgan 49). On this note, the counter argument would go back to the effect of addiction and dependence and the behavior change of users in making users closer to committing crimes. Marijuana use is associated with putting people at risk given the health complications. Since taking the same can increase the heart rate and blood pressure of a user, it could necessarily be part of the most known killer disease – heart attack or stroke or even those “with existing heart or circulation problems” (Morgan 49). Marijuana use can lead to overeating that could lead to obesity and with the latter comes many other health problems (Morgan 50). The lack of scientific support for medical use of marijuana could not simply justify now legalization. Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows the use of not-yet-approved and still-under-investigation drugs, on patients, the basis used is on political ideology rather than science. The FDA flexibility rests on the premise that "terminally ill patients have nothing to lose and should not be deprived of hope"(Gerdes 69). Marinol, a synthetic form of what can be found in marijuana as chemical. The same is FDA-approved for patients undergoing chemo-therapy (Kreit 1787-1826). 2.3 Economic Effects It is claimed that legalization of marijuana production will increase tax revenues for the government instead of allowing drug lords and drug pushers to go underground. By deeper analysis however, it could be asserted that the incremental taxes could not compensate the damage that would be done to citizens and the economy. While the conceivable financial benefits could come from taxing marijuana can be tempting, strong counter arguments support continued prohibition as a more logical choice. It can be pointed out that legalizing and taxing marijuana “will not generate enough revenue to entirely eliminate state and national debts” (Morgan 61). If viewed from a financial viewpoint the fact the expected cash inflows would be beneficial to business, the same cannot be justified if the total cash outflows would be higher. This is therefore the best way to counter the claim for the expected revenues by considering said revenues as cash inflows and considering the more money for rehabilitation and addiction treatment of drug users or dependents particularly for marijuana users (Morgan 61) More cash outflows could be viewed by analogy from loss of productivity if marijuana use is made free for common use. It is claimed that the regulation as a result of legalizing use and production of marijuana would make the flow of money to the American economy rather than benefit the international criminal gangs. Supporters believed legalization would bring the money into the surface away from the underground economy; hence the money could be used for productive economic development (“420 Campaign”). This may be considered as an oversimplification. Regulation would not be able to abate the proliferation of drugs and the consequence could be worse. If by mere regulation, the young ones or children cannot be stopped from smoking cigarettes, legalizing the same could open the flood gates for abuse not only by those who are already addicted by even the children. Destroying the life of the children would be destroying society. It t is argued also legalizing marijuana would cause the use and spread of hemp as an alternatively valuable crop in the US, including into its use as source of bio-fuel which could be friendlier to the environment by reducing carbon emissions. It was even further argued that countries from Europe and Canada surprisingly were successful in supporting marijuana cultivation legally without violating laws on hemp (“420 Campaign”). In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the laws may not be violated with legalization if the harmful effects of are not prevented. The expected economic benefits from taxes and better use of government resources as espoused by legalization proponents could simply not hold true. Said proponents claimed that continued prohibition on the marijuana use and production has become too costly or expensive to present justice system. Thus for them, legalization supporters would rather have it that if authorities from law enforcement could have better use for their time and resources to other more important duties instead of arresting thousands of individual possessors of marijuana. They were pointing out the additional cost of trying to make employment cost in terms of salaries of judges and prosecutors and court personnel. For them wasted jail space, clogged court cases, diverted time of law enforcers, salaries and compensation of lawyers, judges and jail or officials could result to savings “420 Campaign”. These arguments are making false assumptions and they could only happen if there is evidence that to dispute the lost economic values from the drug related crimes and cost to society for those wasted lives of victims. The lives of these victims are priceless. The constitution did no reduce choices of policies in terms of how much could be generated. If legalization is approved on the premise then it would produce more revenues, then there would no need to understand what are punishable as crimes. 3. Conclusion The social effects, health effects and economic effects do speak clearly about the danger of legalizing use and production of marijuana. Society cannot experiment on some untested and unsupported claims on the benefits of legalized use or production of marijuana. Such claims for benefits of the use of marijuana may have been forward and just like other issue there about some advantages and disadvantages of a certain course of action or a choice of policy. It cannot oversimplified by arguing that although it took some time for the people to accept the earth was round and it has bound them in ignorance for years if not centuries, that the government will also just all of sudden legalized what have been long prohibited. Although this present time is the so called information age and that there are primitive that must be undone, legalizing marijuana is not one of them. It cannot be oversimplified that people must open up their minds to the potential benefits that may be had by legalizing the use and production of marijuana after experiences the feared evil of legalizing the same. It would more difficult undo the effects of legalized use and production of marijuana. In the absence of proof of success of legalizing use and production of marijuana, experimenting with human life is simply not an option. The claim benefits need more evidence than mere conjectures. The human mind rational and it could evaluate evidence as to which is true and should be believable. Legalizing the same would be harmful to society socially, healthily and economically. Works Cited: “420 Campaign – Top Ten Reasons Marijuana Should Be Legal”. High Times. 2007. Web. 3 July 2011 Gerdes, L. Legalizing Drugs, Greenhaven Press. San Diego: California, 2001, p. 69 Kreit, A. The Future of Medical Marijuana: Should the States Grow Their Own? University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 151, 2003, pp- 1787-1826 McCollum, B. Medical Marijuana Referenda Movement in America: Congressional Hearing. DIANE Publishing, 2001, p. 156 Messerli, Joe. “Should Marijuana be Legalized under any Circumstances?”. 2011. Balance Politics.org. Web 3 July 2011 Morgan. M. Legalizing Marijuana, ABDO, 2010, pp. 47-61. “Why Marijuana Should Be Legal”. Marijuana Legal Organization. 2002. Web 3 July 2011 Outline 1. Introduction 2.1 Social Effects of legalizing marijuana 2.2 Health Effects 2.3 Economic Effects 3. Conclusion Works cited Read More