Hypocrisy in American Drug Laws

by Nick Harper

When America’s founding fathers wrote the Constitution, was it their intention to extend authority to individuals’ homes and bodies? I do not believe so. In fact, this is exactly the type of oppression that they came to this land to escape from. How can we truly call ourselves a free society when the government attempts to regulate private behaviors and “Big Brother” is always watching? People often refer to the United States as “the land of the free,” but there are many other countries where personal freedoms are more protected.

One such freedom that the American government attempts to regulate is the use of recreational drugs. While doing drugs is not something that I would consider to be a smart decision, I believe that people should be able to make decisions for themselves of what to put into their bodies, and that what people do in the privacy of their own home is no one’s business, as long as no one else is being harmed. My biggest concern with current drug laws has much less to do with drugs than it has to do with personal freedom.

The use and cultivation of marijuana should not be illegal. Once considered to be an underground drug used primarily by black jazz musicians, marijuana has now evolved into a mainstream drug, with the baby boomer generation having come of age smoking it. It is a naturally growing plant on our earth, rather than a more dangerous chemical creation. No one in the history of the world has ever died from an overdose of marijuana. You cannot physically smoke enough of it to kill you, which is amazing when you consider that you can drink enough water to kill yourself. Does this suggest that water is more toxic to the body than marijuana? Marijuana is prescribed for the sick in some situations, yet the use of it by the well is a criminal activity, although it is a victimless crime.

American drug laws are hypocritical. Our government allows and even financially supports the tobacco and alcohol industries, which have proven negative health impacts, and cost billions of dollars to the economy each year, in terms of health alone. This gives legal sanction to activities that are much more harmful than the smoking of marijuana. If the use of alcohol and tobacco are legal, then certainly marijuana should be as well.

Many of the current drug laws in America are based upon reactions from misleading and false information about drugs perpetuated during the first half of the twentieth century. The first law about marijuana came about as a result of an active media campaign against it spearheaded by Rupert Murdock. It demonized the drug through scare tactics designed to make it seem very evil and dangerous. “Reefer Madness” was a propaganda film made in 1936 that showed a group of high school students experiencing every dire thing possible as a result of trying marijuana. Since that time, the government has attempted to exert increasing control over the use of drugs.

The government’s “war on drugs” has been a complete failure and cost the American taxpayers a great deal of money. Despite all the laws passed, drug use continues to rise. The government is not going to be able to stop people from using drugs. This war is unwinnable. Two-thirds of all prisoners are incarcerated for drug-related offenses, causing them to be overcrowded. This is a tremendous drain on our economy. It gives people criminal records for not having done anything that many people consider to be truly criminal. There are far more serious things that law enforcement officials should be focusing their efforts on than busting the casual marijuana user or dealer.

The real social issue with government control of drug use is the loss of personal freedom. Since it is foolish to believe that Americans can be stopped from using drugs, a new approach toward this problem is needed. The government should rethink current drug laws and stop prosecuting people for minor offenses. The money saved could be used to educate citizens about drugs with truthful, scientific evidence, so that people can make their own informed and intelligent decisions for themselves.

The Impracticalities of Criminalized Marijuana

by Joe Costa

Fifty-one thousand, seven hundred twenty five; as I sit here and write this in the middle of January, I wonder about the significance of this number.  To me, it looks like it could be a number as relatively trivial as the projected undergraduate enrollment population for the 2008-2009 school year.  However, a number such as this one has much more terrifying implications; it is the number of marijuana-related arrests so far in 2008, a frighteningly high number for a drug that many of us have tried or used, and that few have ever had any sort of real consequences for.  While the broadest topic of this week is obviously the War on Drugs, I would like to particularly tackle the necessary decriminalization of marijuana possession.

The fact is, I can’t think directly of any major consequences, heath-related or otherwise, that marijuana offers that aren’t otherwise found with alcohol- and cigarette-use, in equal or greater amounts.  Most of the marijuana users that I’ve encountered aren’t criminals or bad people.  In fact, the only thing that most users I know pose a threat to is their mom’s snack cabinet and that secret stash of Hot Pockets at the back of the freezer.

But really, to deal in facts instead of half-witty quips and lame stereotypes, recreational marijuana uses cause about the same amount of lung damage that an average cigarette smoker causes to themselves.  Many will argue that marijuana contains more tar and other substances that cause lung damage; however, most of these researchers are also neglecting to take into account that the vast majority of marijuana users will not smoke 20 joints (or the equivalent) in a day, while millions of Americans are currently pack-a-day smokers.  As a matter of fact, even the most jaded burnout who doesn’t leave his or her couch for anything aside from the alarm on the microwave signaling that his or her pizza rolls are ready, probably doesn’t smoke more than maybe five or six times a day.  A high number, for sure, but not even remotely in the arena of the millions of cigarette smokers who routinely bounce through a pack every day.

As for the judgment-hindering effects of marijuana, it is hard to deny the negative affects on one’s judgment.  Yes, marijuana is prone to causing breakdowns in the judgment of users.  Some of the effects of a marijuana-induced high include sleepiness, laziness, an inability to operate heavy machinery (read: door knobs), and an increased appetite.  However, alcohol, the most popular drug in the United States (according to the NORML website), has been known to cause an even more extreme lapse of judgment and is actually more dangerous than marijuana use by far when it comes to driving while under the influence.  In fact, according to Paul Armentano and his article in High Times in August of 2002, “emerging scientific research indicates that cannabis actually has far less impact on the psychomotor skills needed for driving than alcohol does, and is seldom a causal factor in automobile accidents”.

A study done by Britain’s Transport Research Laboratory, which had volunteers under the influence of either alcohol or marijuana try their hand at a driving simulator, actually stated that “marijuana only adversely impacted subjects’ ability to maintain a constant speed and control while driving around a figure-eight loop.  Reaction time and all other measures of driving performance remained unaffected.  Researchers also noted that the subjects who had smoked marijuana – unlike alcohol users – were aware of their impairment and attempted to compensate for it by driving more cautiously.”  Even with this as the case though, most pro-marijuana decriminalization lobbyists have made it a point to regulate driving when combined with marijuana use, among other things.

To summarize my two main points, marijuana usage is actually proven to be less dangerous than the two most popular drugs in the United States today; alcohol and tobacco.  While an individual joint of marijuana may contain up to four times the amount of tar as one cigarette according to the Surgeon General’s website, most marijuana users are also not as prone to smoking the equivalent of an entire pack of cigarettes a day, as millions of cigarette smokers are.  In terms of impaired judgment, marijuana users are also much less likely to be a danger to others on the road while driving impaired compared to those driving under the influence of alcohol.

But just because marijuana is not as dangerous as tobacco and alcohol does not mean that the decriminalization and legalization of it should not be regulated by laws much like alcohol and tobacco are.  NORML, who serves as the primary lobby for the decriminalization of the drug, has adopted a five-part manifesto called the “Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use”, which outlines the definition of “responsible cannabis use” and includes the regulations that one must be a legal adult, that one cannot drive while under the influence, that one must be wary of the appropriateness of the setting, that one must resist abuse, and that one must respect the rights of others to not become involved in the use of the drug if that is their desire.

The criminalization of marijuana is both expensive and impractical; jailing non-violent criminals for something as trivial as using a drug that is less dangerous than both alcohol and tobacco is crowding our jails and costing the American people more and more money each year.  With the proper restrictions in place, and a tax on the sale of legalized marijuana, the government would be able to take a great deal of money and invest it into other ventures that are much more vital than imprisoning nonviolent transgressors, such as health care or education.  Not for nothing, but the snack food industry could always use an increase in sales.  Let Hostess and Little Debbie thrive!