[ back ]
Editorial: Marijuana use should still be an illegal activity
Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts announced a proposal to eliminate the federal penalties for the possession and not-for-profit transfer of small amounts of marijuana for the personal use "by responsible adults."
The bill, number HR 5843, would remove the federal penalties for possession of up to 100 grams and the not-for-profit transfer of one ounce of marijuana. The legislation would also provide for a civil penalty of $100 for the public use of marijuana.
The bill would not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of marijuana for profit, the importing and exporting of marijuana or the manufacturing of the substance. The law would also not change any state or local laws or regulations regarding the use, sale or manufacturing of marijuana.
Although this proposed legislation does not seem like it would have a large impact on the government’s attempt to keep as many drugs out of the country, what it does do is set a dangerous precedent.
While a very small percentage of marijuana users are arrested and tried at the federal level, this legislation opens the door for individual states to change their laws to allow people to use marijuana and other illegal substances.
Some people would argue that smoking marijuana is no different than drinking alcohol or smoking a cigarette. But there is a difference. Marijuana is an illegal substance. While the sale of alcohol and cigarettes is limited to people of certain ages, marijuana is not. Nor should it be. It should remain an illegal substance, except in cases of medical use.
Most people are not in favor of "big government." They do not want the government invading people’s personal lives and telling them what they can and cannot do. When the 18th Amendment to the Constitution was passed prohibiting the sale of liquor it exacerbated the problem. More people drank. Some people argue that marijuana use would not be as widespread as it is if it were legal. But we disagree.
Making illicit drugs legal is not beneficial. It would only cause the problem to get worse. More people would get high. What if you could buy marijuana as easily as you could buy a pack of cigarettes? And who gets to determine how old someone should be before they can buy it? And if it starts with marijuana, what’s next, supposedly "harder" drugs like heroin and cocaine?
Marijuana should remain an illegal drug, regardless of how much someone has on him or her or why they have it in their possession. The consequences of anything less are too far-reaching and potentially dangerous for everyone.
| Comments (25) |
On November 11, 2008, Bryan said:
Wow! Whoever wrote this article is an idiot. There isn't anything factual about your statements on this issue. Want the facts??? Here there are.... http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/download-materials/TandRARGUMENTS092008.pdf |
| |
On September 8, 2008, Shawn said:
The author had to have been high when they wrote this. Seriously. |
| |
On September 5, 2008, Will said:
A suggestion to the author: get a lobotomy. Your logic is failed and your brain is about as useful as tits on a bull. Saying something should be a crime because its illegal is like saying that poor people shouldn't strive to get rich simply because they are already poor. It's called circular logic.
Most of us stoners, potheads, junkies, whatever you will call us, are respectable, responsible members of society. And most of us do think there's a difference between smoking Cannabis and smoking tobacco or drinking alcohol. In fact I know there's a difference. Cannabis has killed zero (0) people in recorded history, while every year alcohol claims +100,000 American lives a year, and tobacco a staggering +450,000. Another main difference, as you so eloquently put, is that alcohol and tobacco are regulated for potency and age of use. With the all the regulations in the hands of criminals, children can acquire Cannabis in almost an city in America.
Within the same construct that allows school children the obtain illegal drugs (without any cap on potency,) all the profit remains untaxed. That means that the wealth stays in the pockets of the leaders of drug rings. The DEA estimates that American citizens spend $11 Billion ($11,000,000,000) dollars a year on acquiring Cannabis. If we were to tax and regulate it like alcohol we could easily pull roughly %10 from that and put it toward our suffering public education programs. And it costs roughly $20,000 per inmate per year in America. The cost of a 9 month drug treatment program is far cheaper than that.
Another fun fact is that %80 of all Cannabis related arrests are for possession, not trafficking, distribution, or manufacturing (which should in all honesty should be called "Growing," seeing as how its a naturally occurring plant.) Yet another ridiculous fact is that its a far greater crime to grow several plants for your own personal use than it is to go visit a tax dodging and possibly dangerous drug dealer. Some people may argue that even growing one plant is evidence that you are trying to manufacture, sell, and commit tax fraud. However, that is a blatant platform of ignorance. The average yield of a single Cannabis plant, depending on the strain, is roughly three (3) ounces. Not enough to sell for a living giving the time and care it takes to grow any plant aside from cacti.
Gang related violence, more times than not, revolves around the drug trade. If you were to legalize drugs, in general, you would put the criminals out of business. Much like when the 18th Amendment(the one that banned alcohol) was overturned, contraband related violence would plummet. And most states in which it has been decriminalized, medical or recreational, have seen a decline in its use. If you take away the taboo, you break the attraction to it from the younger crowd. The only bad thing that could possibly happen if Cannabis were decriminalized is a weakened alcohol market, which is still highly unlikely.
As for the gateway drug myth, I, along with most people I know,
drank alcohol or smoked cigarettes well before we ever even tried Cannabis. And guess who it is that introduces Cannabis users to harder drugs. It's the drug dealers, who would be forced out of the Cannabis industry if it were decriminalized.
The only precedent this legislature would provide is that Cannabis is far less harmful than we have been told by our government since 1937. It would open doors for industrial hemp in this country. Did you know that one(1) acre of hemp yields as a much pulp fiber for paper as ten(10) acres of tress a year? Or that the stalks from the hemp plant can be used to make bio-diesel? Or that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson dedicated acres of the property for hemp "manufacturing"? It was even mandated that farmers grow hemp during colonial times as well as World War II during the steel shortage. It truly is one of the most versatile crops, and in 1937 (shortly before "Marijuana" was criminalized) Popular Mechanics Magazine called Hemp the first "Billion Dollar Crop". And that figure hasn't been adjusted for inflation.
The only thing that we are accomplishing with Cannabis prohibition is the annual waste of $4.5 Billion($4,500,000,000) in taxes and the neglect of an $11 Billion market (not including the copious and profitable industrial and medical uses.) We are keeping the real criminals rich and making our neighbors, friends, and families into criminals. If anyone is reading this and has at least half a brain in their skull they would write their congressional representative and tell them to back this legislation. We have nothing to lose and more than $15 Billion annually to gain.
P.S.
If you are stoned and too lazy to write your congressperson, click this link and fill out the info. It automatically sends your representative a letter supporting this House Resolution. http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=11280301 |
| |
On September 3, 2008, Anonymous said:
"The bill would not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of marijuana for profit, the importing and exporting of marijuana or the manufacturing of the substance."
the manufacturing of the substance??
you mean, the planting of a seed into soil?
its this sort of terminology that seems to keep marijuana law in its place. by using these clever synonyms to describe the growth of a plant, which occurs in nature every day, congress and journalists have made something either wise normal into a criminal act. it is a plant. there is no other terminology for it.
well, actually, its a flower :). |
| |
On September 2, 2008, Bob said:
The author's reasoning is quite flawed here. The author says "What if you could buy marijuana as easily as you could buy a pack of cigarettes". This just shows how out of touch the author (who remains unnamed and refers to himself as "we")really is with the reality of this particular situation.
The reality is that marijuana is readily available to school children in every corner of this country. Instead of needing proof of age to buy marijuana (which is what they need to obtain alcohol and tobacco) they need only to know a dealer or someone who knows a dealer. Pot dealers are a dime a dozen-and they don't card their customers.
The author refers to marijuana as an "illicit substance" and seems to only offer the argument that "we shouldn't legalize something that's illegal, because it's illegal". I'm guessing the author assumes that marijuana is legal for a good reason but doesn't give any facts to support.
I would argue that if you legalize marijuana, you can tax it AND stop spending tax money to enforce the laws that make it illegal. Right now, we as a nation are dumping cash upon a problem that isn't fixed in such a way. It's like trying to remedy an amputation with a band-aid. We need another solution if you want to call marijuana use a "problem". Legalize it, tax it, and use those funds to educate children about it. Free up your local police force to go after the cocaine and heroin dealers in your neighborhood.
|
| |
On August 19, 2008, An Unidentified Member said:
Having alcohol and cigarettes legal while marijuana illegal is just plan idiotic.
The truth is that the alcohol and cigarette lobbies don't want the competition that's all. |
| |
On August 18, 2008, An Unidentified Member said:
I think marijuana is a great thing. I have smoked daily for more than four years now and am currently a junior in college on my way to becoming an engineer. If something has no negative effects on someone's life, then why should it be illegal? |
| |
On August 17, 2008, rp said:
<< Some people would argue that smoking marijuana is no different than drinking alcohol or smoking a cigarette. But there is a difference. Marijuana is an illegal substance >>
Actually, some people would argue that smoking marijuana *is different* from drinking alcohol or smoking a cigarette.
Why? Because smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol are both physically addictive, and can kill you.
It's physically impossible to be addicted to cannabis, and physically impossible to overdose.
Nice try, though. Next. |
| |
On August 17, 2008, Paul said:
Unless you're willing to send your relatives and friends to prison for smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol, please stop opening your mouth and wasting 30 seconds of everyone's life with your hypocrisy. |
| |
On August 16, 2008, Lisa said:
This article must have been written by someone at most just out of high school, maybe first year of college. This is really bad. |
| |
On August 14, 2008, mike said:
That was the most poorly written article I have ever read. "Some people argue that marijuana use would not be as widespread as it s if it were legal. But we disagree" Wow, great point there. I hope this writer of this is in the 7th grade. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Oli said:
An appropriate quote for the quality of this editorial:
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
'nuff said! |
| |
On August 13, 2008, LJ said:
It's an issue of how our tax dollars are being spent. I want our police to be going after criminals like murderers, rapists, thieves and illegal aliens. I don't care what intoxicants people put in their systems, I don't care if they rent out their naughty parts for another's pleasure, and I don't care if they gamble away their paychecks.
I don't do any of those activities, but it's a waste of time whenever the government tries to legislate morality when others' actions aren't harming me, my freedom, or my property.
|
| |
On August 13, 2008, JOE said:
THIS GUY IS A DOUCHE BAG! |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Jay said:
"Some people would argue that smoking marijuana is no different than drinking alcohol or smoking a cigarette. But there is a difference. Marijuana is an illegal substance. While the sale of alcohol and cigarettes is limited to people of certain ages, marijuana is not. Nor should it be. It should remain an illegal substance, except in cases of medical use."k
That is, quite possibly, the worst logic I've ever heard for keeping it illegal.
So, it should be illegal because it's illegal? Very silly reasoning. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Ryan said:
Wow...This dude is an idiot. Its people like you sir that give america a bad name. This guy needs to die. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Ben said:
The fact is sir, that cannabis is safer than alcohol and tobacco, both of which are peddled to the youth of our nation. In fact teen marijuana use has fallen in states with medical cannabis laws. Among the twelve states that have legalized the use and cultivation of medical cannabis, all but one (New Mexico) have experienced an overall decline in teen marijuana use since the enactment of their medi-pot laws. (Data was unavailable for New Mexico, which passed its law last year.) In seven of the twelve states, marijuana use among young people declined at rates that exceeded the national average. We aren't drug loving hippies, we are life loving people, burn one down. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Jim said:
You really have no logistical skill
die. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Jeff said:
Obviously logic isn't your strong point. The fact that it's illegal in the first place is a gross miscarriage of justice, which you can't even reasonably defend (oh sure, you say "we disagree", but that seems to be the limit of your thought process).
The real question is, why in a free society, should a government with no constitutional granted authority to restrict what you willingly put into your own body, be able to do so? |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Don said:
GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! GO BARNEY GO!!!! |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Dave said:
So you're saying marijuana should remain illegal simply because it is already illegal? Should alcohol be illegal because it was during the 13 year prohibition? Do a little research next time. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, mike said:
You point out that more people started drinking because of prohibition. Then try to say that the opposite would occur if cannabis were legal. From two society's that have legalized cannabis to some extent they have succeeded in making it boring, non-taboo, most Dutch don't smoke cannabis. Most people are not in favor of "big government", we want to enjoy the pursuit of happiness in our homes without fear. We want our states to have the power to chose the criminal laws we live under. What's good for New Jersey may not be the Best for Washington state. Quit spreading FUD it's dishonest. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, An Unidentified Member said:
"Some people would argue that smoking marijuana is no different than drinking alcohol or smoking a cigarette. But there is a difference. Marijuana is an illegal substance."
-That is why they are trying to change the law so that it is not illegal. Not a single person in recorded history has ever died of a marijuana overdose, people die every day from alcohol overdoses and don't get me started on cigarettes. We spend billions and billions arresting and jailing otherwise non-violent "criminals" for the vast majority of mere possession. There are more people in jail for marijuana then ALL violent crimes put together, is that an efficient use of the police's time?
"While the sale of alcohol and cigarettes is limited to people of certain ages, marijuana is not. Nor should it be. It should remain an illegal substance, except in cases of medical use."
-You do not state why it should remain illegal, is it because it already is? You have to ask yourself why is it illegal, browse history and you will see that as a society we have used laws to affect a class of people more so than the general population. Cocaine carries a certain punishment (as most Caucasian people prefer this drug) while crack cocaine which is nearly identical chemical makeup merely cooked carries severely harsher punishments (as most of these crimes are committed by African Americans). Marijuana legislation started long ago as a way to combat the migrant workers coming into America to work the fields, as they were seen as taking away jobs from Americans (jobs that most Americans did not and still do not want to do). Then you say except in cases of medical use. The DEA currently classifies marijuana as having no medicinal value whatsoever. This classification prohibits any type of federal funding or research by a school that receives federal funding to experiment and find out novel ways to use the drug in medicine. As the federal laws currently prohibit medicinal marijuana, should they not be changed as well because they are currently illegal?
"Making illicit drugs legal is not beneficial. It would only cause the problem to get worse."
-According to history, with prohibition and its subsequent repeal, your statement is in error. The lucrative underground bootlegging trade dried up, a semi-free market sprang up and did what it did best by replacing the criminals with businesses.
"More people would get high. What if you could buy marijuana as easily as you could buy a pack of cigarettes?"
-Other countries that have legalized marijuana have not had this problem, in fact most if not all of these countries experienced a drop in usage as a bit of the glory was taken away and replaced by the normal and mundane.
"And who gets to determine how old someone should be before they can buy it?"
-Congress, state legislators, and local legislators; their job is to create laws to protect the public and better society. This is not outside of what they are doing or should be doing. Put simply, it is their job!
"And if it starts with marijuana, what’s next, supposedly 'harder' drugs like heroin and cocaine?"
-Does alcohol make you want to try other mind altering drugs like LSD? Does caffeine make you want to try other drugs like meth amphetamines? For some the answer is yes, do we then outlaw everything that leads to everything else, where does it stop? If you go back far enough a trip to Disney World could bring out such excitement that you may later want to experience that excitement in a drug form (bye bye Disney!). Automatically assuming one thing leads to another leads to the thinking that we can always predict what a person will do in a given event, again history teaches us that this is not possible. People are going to do what they want when they want it, you cannot successfully protect someone from doing something they want to do. |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Logical said:
Yes it is clear the author has never used the drug |
| |
On August 13, 2008, Oli said:
What a crappy case of circular logic. You should be ashamed of yourself for writing such drivel. |
| |
[ back ]
|
