Legalizing Marijuana Essay Example

of marijuana even if it's solely for medical purposes. Critics argue against legalization because they believe it would allow unrestricted cultivation, smoking, and consumption of marijuana. The Lakeland Police Department classifies marijuana as a psychoactive drug with potential negative effects such as anxiety, depression, paranoia, delusion, lack of motivation aggression,risky behavior,and depersonalization (Marijuana Legalization Issues 1).

Opponents claim that prolonged and excessive use can lead to physical harm. They argue that if a constitutional amendment is passed to allow the medicinal use of marijuana, it would grant everyone including children,felons,and prisoners,the right to cultivate and consume marijuana for minor ailments such as headaches or colds. Moreover,
they claim that unlike other drug addicts,marijuana addicts are slow in recognizing their addiction.Extensive research has shown that alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana can act as gateways to harder drug addiction. People who have used marijuana are more likely to try and use harder drugs compared to those who haven't. However, this doesn't mean that decriminalizing marijuana is unjustified. Just like excessive alcohol consumption can have negative effects, consuming too much marijuana also has health consequences. It would be contradictory to prohibit marijuana based solely on its addictive properties when tobacco is legal. By implementing regulations on dosage, quality control measures, safety guidelines, and age restrictions, we can regulate the medical or beneficial uses of marijuana. Educating individuals about potential side effects when combining it with prescription drugs empowers them to make informed choices. Therefore, caution should be exercised in legalizing marijuana because there are costs associated with prohibition in terms of financial resources and human lives lost. Since 1981, federal spending on drug enforcement has tripled to $3 billion annually. The

budgets for the DEA and Coast Guard have also increased from around $220 million to about $500 million in the past seven years.Over time, resources dedicated to drug enforcement by various law enforcement agencies have significantly increased. The FBI's funding has risen from $8 million per year to over $100 million, the U.S. Marshals' resources have increased from $26 million to about $80 million, and the U.S. Attorney's resources expanded from $20 million to approximately $100 million (Nadelman 8). Moreover, both U.S. Customs and the Bureau of Prisons have also seen increases in their resources. U.S. Customs funding has gone up from $180 million to approximately $400 million, while the Bureau of Prison's resources have increased from $77 million to about $300 million.

Calculating spending on drug control by military and intelligence agents is challenging but it has also significantly increased, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars annually. When considering federal, state, and local governments collectively spend around$75 billion each year on law enforcementand criminal justice programs,it becomes evident that a substantial portion of this funding is allocated directly or indirectly towardsdrug law enforcement efforts.Approximately$20 billion is directly allocatedto drug law enforcement with an additional$15billion connectedto crimes relatedtodrug moneyorcommerce.This means that around$35billion per year goes towards drug law enforcement efforts or is lost due to crimes committed for obtaining drugs money.Altogether,this demonstratesa significant investmentin combatingdrug-relatedcrimesand enforcingdrug laws throughoutthe country.
Benson Roe suggests that the issue at hand is the substantial amount of untaxed money going to criminals rather than solely focusing on drugs. This results in a total expenditure of $100 billion when considering wasteful spending on ineffective government drug suppression activities and losses from inflated prices

due to illicit drug trade. The economic incentive for drug dealers to aggressively sell drugs leads to billions in revenue, which has a greater impact on increasing substance abuse compared to any enforcement program's ability to reduce usage. Roe points out that a low-budget public education campaign successfully decreased alcohol and tobacco consumption in the US, while an expensive and intensive campaign targeting illegal drugs only led to increased usage. Instead of completely eliminating drugs, Roe proposes treating them similarly to how we treat alcohol and tobacco by acknowledging their presence in society. Legalizing drugs would allow the FDA to regulate their purity, ensuring safe consumption. Furthermore, labeled product concentration would prevent overdose incidents and eliminate aggressive marketing from dealers. This approach would save money on enforcement efforts and generate significant tax revenues that could be redirected towards educating the public about the dangers of all drugs.
Legalization of marijuana would not only save government money, but also allow for tax collection on its sales. By directing these additional funds towards drug education programs and other important causes such as education, children's welfare, and healthcare initiatives, the government could effectively address pressing issues. Currently in the US, billions of dollars are spent annually by all levels of government to arrest recreational drug users. However, legalizing marijuana alone would provide the government with more financial resources to focus on crucial matters instead. In fact, over the past three decades, more than 10 million people in the US have been arrested for marijuana-related offenses - mainly for possession and use (Glasser 133). These individuals were ordinary taxpayers striving to support their families and improve their children's lives; yet

they were suddenly treated as criminals due to their recreational choices. Presently, there are numerous individuals serving prison sentences or facing penalties like probation, fines, and civil sanctions. Additionally, these punishments may lead to property seizure or loss of licenses or employment termination.Those who are charged with marijuana offenses face various consequences, including being denied access to state and federal benefits such as college loans, small business loans, farm subsidies, occupational licenses, and government grants contracts and fellowships (Morgan and Zimmer 38 and 43). Despite the alarming rates of incarceration for marijuana-related offenses, federal and state prison populations have increased by 90% since the mid-1980s without any significant change in crime rates. More than half of all inmates in prisons continue to be incarcerated on drug charges (Heath 48). The extensive imprisonment that has occurred has not been effective in reducing crime. Mandatory sentencing, elimination of parole, and construction of more jail cells do not prioritize rehabilitation and seem to have limited deterrent effects. Criminalizing marijuana users has negative consequences such as hindering effective treatments and imprisoning a significant number of people. The population in prisons and jails has doubled over the last decade and tripled since 1980. Multiple scholars and government commissions agree that marijuana use does not lead to an increase in crime. Most marijuana users are peaceful individuals who do not engage in criminal activities except for possessing marijuana. Even those who commit crimes are not influenced by marijuana.Research consistently shows that marijuana has a calming effect on aggression, and if it were to be legalized, any associated violence would disappear. By distributing the drug in a controlled and regulated environment, the

illegal market and its related criminality would be eliminated. This legalization would lead to a decrease in crime and violence. Imprisoning innocent people based solely on their choice to use marijuana is unjust and causes immense suffering for American families both emotionally and financially. It also fosters disrespect towards the law and the criminal justice system as a whole. Responsible marijuana users do not pose a threat or harm to society; therefore, treating them as criminals lacks justification. Marijuana, also known as cannabis, should be legalized for medicinal purposes due to its safety and effectiveness as a medicine. Despite its long history dating back to 2737 B.C., when Chinese emperor Shen Nung recognized its medical properties, marijuana has never gained the same medical status as drugs like morphine and opium did over time. Medical reports from the 1890s already acknowledged its efficacy as a painkiller, which is further discussed in Grispoon's book (136). Despite controversy surrounding its use as medicine, it has been tested and found effective in treating various conditions such as glaucoma, asthma, convulsions, epilepsy, migraine headaches, and chemotherapy side effects including nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite.Many medical professionals and patients believe that marijuana has potential in treating various disorders, including multiple sclerosis spasticity in amputees and neurological conditions. This belief is supported by both anecdotal evidence and scientific research. According to a survey, the majority of Americans (85%) support legal access to marijuana for seriously ill patients who risk arrest in order to obtain relief from diseases like cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, and other devastating illnesses (Stroup 14-15).

Supporters of medical marijuana challenge opponents by highlighting flaws in their arguments. For

instance, they point out the shortcomings of marinol, an expensive pill containing THC which causes higher levels of anxiety and depression compared to smoked marijuana. Furthermore, they argue that the government's reluctance to cooperate with scientists has hindered thorough testing on marijuana.

Dr.[last name]Donald Abrams, an AIDS researcher, has faced difficulties obtaining marijuana from the National Institute on Drug Abuse for research purposes. However, NIDA argues that supplying Abrams with marijuana could result in an overwhelming number of requests from other researchers. Brookhiser sarcastically comments that this cannot be allowed as it may lead to actual research (149).The third argument counters the belief that using medical marijuana sets a negative example for children targeted by drug dealers. Instead, it argues that children observe bald cancer patients using intravenous drugs and learn that drugs are not glamorous or enjoyable. Basic human compassion and common sense dictate that sick individuals should be permitted to use the most effective medication under a doctor's supervision. Various groups and states have made progress in decriminalizing medical marijuana. Keith Stroup, founder of NORML, believes that the government's opposition to doctors prescribing marijuana for pain relief and nausea has actually advanced efforts toward legalization. According to Stroup, "The more they fight this battle, the more progress we make," causing Americans to reconsider their stance on marijuana when they witness the lack of assistance provided by the government for terminally ill patients (Cauchon 1). Robert Hussey, an advocate for legalizing marijuana, agrees that support for medical marijuana has grown. The Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative would allow licensed physicians to prescribe marijuana as a treatment option for individuals with severe illnesses if

approved. This initiative also legalizes the possession, cultivation, and distribution of marijuana specifically for medical purposes such as HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, muscle spasms, cancer therapy, and other serious ailments.The text highlights that the Director of Public Health is required to create a plan for providing marijuana to qualified patients in approved programs. However, it emphasizes that using marijuana without a doctor's recommendation is strictly prohibited. Since 1973, eleven states have implemented modified decriminalization laws, reducing penalties for minor marijuana offenses and replacing them with small civil fines similar to traffic tickets instead of arrest and imprisonment. This approach benefits users by preventing criminal records and allows law enforcement officers to focus on more serious crimes. About one-third of Americans live in states where decriminalization has been in effect for 15-20 years, resulting in positive experiences. Surprisingly, rates of marijuana usage remain consistent compared to states where smokers are still being arrested, and young people's attitudes towards using marijuana have not changed either. This evidence supports the idea that the government can stop arresting marijuana smokers without adverse effects. In February 1996, the NORML Board of Directors released Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use, which offers guidelines for responsible marijuana smokersThe document stresses the importance of only adults using marijuana and strongly advises against driving while under its influence. It also emphasizes the need to consider factors such as environment and appropriateness before smoking. Smokers must avoid abuse, use responsibly, and prevent addiction. They are also encouraged to show respect for others' rights by refraining from smoking around disapproving individuals. These guidelines include additional requirements (Stoup 11-12). The topic of medical marijuana was debated through statewide ballot propositions

in California and Arizona in November 1996. Both states agreed that marijuana should be allowed for medical purposes. In California, it was known as Prop.215, while in Arizona it was called Prop.205 (Stoup 11-12). However, the proposition in Arizona was effectively revoked by the legislature by 1998, whereas law enforcement officials in California developed innovative strategies to handle the new law's implementation.The full consequences of this law are still unclear, but its potential benefits have been recognized and other states are closely observing California's experiment (The War on Drugs 142). In a 1995 editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Lester Grispoon and James B. Bakalar emphasized one significant advantage of marijuana as medicine: its outstanding safety profileThey noted that marijuana has minimal impact on major psychological functions and there are no known cases of lethal overdose in humans. Animal studies estimate the effective to lethal dose ratio to be around 40,000 to 1 (Postrel 175). In the 1970s, there were widespread claims about negative effects of marijuana such as brain cell destruction, psychosis induction, reduced testosterone levels and sperm count, breast development in adolescent males, impaired memory and intellectual function, compromised immune system, chromosome breakage genetic damage,and birth defects. These claims were often sensationalized with alarming commentary in front-page reports. However, subsequent research has questioned these findings as many original studies could not be replicated and were deemed insignificant. Contrary to popular belief, there have been no confirmed cases linking marijuana use to major pulmonary issues (Grispoon 139). Research funded by the American government in Jamaica and Greece found no physical or mental problems among heavy, long-term users of marijuana. Additionally,

numerous studies have shown that even high-dose and long-term use of marijuana does not result in physical dependence or withdrawal symptoms.In the past 25 years, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has conducted research investigating claims made against marijuana during the Eastland hearings of 1974. These studies have examined various aspects of human health and behavior affected by cannabis use, such as reproductive health, lung function, social adjustments compared to non-users. Additionally, researchers have compared academic performance and wages between marijuana smokers and non-smokers. The potential link between marijuana use and highway accidents has also been explored through analysis of driving fatality data. Epidemiologists have investigated whether there is a connection between marijuana use and involvement with hard-core illegal drugs. Experiments in laboratory settings have assessed the effects of marijuana on memory, motivation, psychomotor skills, and social interaction by administering high doses of THC to both humans and animals for extended periods. Furthermore, human cells have been exposed to THC and marijuana smoke in laboratory experiments to observe any cellular abnormalities under a microscope. In 1982, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted a review of over ten years' worth of research on marijuana building upon the findings from the Shafer Commission in 1972.Both committees did not find convincing evidence suggesting biological harm, psychological impairment, or social dysfunction among marijuana users (Morgan and Zimmer 8-12). However, it is important to acknowledge that this evidence does not claim that marijuana is completely safe or immune to misuse. It is crucial to recognize that all drugs, even those legalized ones, have the potential for misuse and can be hazardous. While available

evidence suggests that moderate use of marijuana seems relatively safe, it should be noted that any risks associated with smoking marijuana are ultimately personal choices within a free society. The only clearly identified risk is respiratory damage from long-term and heavy use. Claims of other biological harms like brain damage, infertility, and immune system impairment are based on studies using higher doses of marijuana than those used by humans for its psychoactive effects. Individuals who use marijuana have not shown any harmful side effects. Unlike most drugs, there is no known lethal dose of marijuana. Similar to penicillin in the 1940s, marijuana has three significant qualities: it is relatively non-toxic even at high doses, cost-effective to produce in large quantities, and versatile. While not without risk altogether, marijuana is less toxic than many conventional medications it could replace if legalized. Medical cannabis would be considerably cheaper compared to street prices ranging from $200 to $400 per ounce;Legalizing marijuana could lead to a price range of $20 to $30 per ounce or approximately 30 to 40 cents per marijuana cigarette (Grispoon 142-1213). It is considered affordable and versatile, with the ability to treat illnesses, improve moods, and alleviate tension. Derived from cannabis, hemp has various practical uses like producing rope, twine, fabric parchment, and cleaner-burning fuel. If marijuana were legalized, societal resources could be redirected towards improving towns and investing in schools. This would result in more classrooms and essential materials for schools without the need for programs like Robin Hood. Additionally, legalization could tackle prison overcrowding issues and potentially boost the economy through regulated sales with taxes applied. Although marijuana is referred to by different

names such as weed or grass, some sources argue that it should be legalized for medicinal purposes. However, caution is advised regarding legalization according to sources who describe drug prohibition as an unnatural disaster (www.geocites.com 2-3; Cauchon; Domenech; Duke). Advocates of marijuana legalization believe it should be decriminalized (Glasser) and emphasize its potential medical advantages (Grispoon).The text discusses false reports about marijuana and its medicinal use (Zimmer; Brookhiser). It highlights the failure of prohibition (Brookhiser) and proposes marijuana legalization (Chapter Preface). The war on drugs is analyzed as a metaphor in American culture (Heath). Postrel, Eugene's "The War on Drugs" explores the safety of marijuana found in David L. Bender et al.'s book "The War on Drugs," specifically on pages 46-53. Roe, Benson also discusses drug legalization within those same pages. Various sources address different aspects of marijuana, including the "Marijuana Legalization Organization" which provides information on marijuana's health effects, issues related to its legalization, and links to violence. Morgan, John P., and Zimmer's book "Marijuana Myths Marijuana Facts" examines myths and facts surrounding marijuana. Nadelmann, Ethan A.'s "The Case for Legalization" available at The Lindesmith Center - Drug Policy Foundation presents arguments favoring drug legalization. Susan Terkel's book "Should Drugs Be Legalized?" offers insights into the ongoing debate on this topic. Additionally, the "Marijuana Legalization Organization" features an article titled "Why Marijuana Should Be Legal." Together, these sources comprehensively explore drug legalization.The text contains a total of 3,660 words, spanning across 24 pages with an average of 165 words per page.