The public’s feelings about marijuana are slowly changing. For years, the public has only known marijuana for its negative properties. With the proposal of many new laws, the public is slowly starting to understand the truth about marijuana. With that being said, I do understand where the anti-marijuana advocates are coming from. Although there are many health experts that say marijuana is harmless to the human body, there are many things we do not know about this plant. Is marijuana addicting and does it have long lasting effects in the brain? These are important questions that must be answered in order to fully decriminalize this drug. There have been some studies that prove that marijuana can adversely affect some users. Some effects that marijuana can have are increased risks of motor vehicle crashes, impaired respiratory function, cardiovascular disease, and psychotic symptoms. According to the study of cannabis use and schizophrenia in Sweden, it found that those who had tried cannabis by age 18 were 2.4 times more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia than those who had not (Hall 13). There is also the theory of how decriminalizing the drug will not solve our drug control problems. Since distribution will still be illegal, the drug wars between dealers will not mitigate. Although this might be true, decriminalizing the drug will save the government huge amounts of money now being spent on the enforcement of such laws.
I believe that marijuana should be decriminalized because it has more advantages than disadvantages. One reason is that it will save the government so much money and time now being spent on the enforcement of such marijuana laws. “On a national level, a recent report by Jon Gettman estimated that national criminal justice expenditures for enforcing marijuana laws is $7.6 billion per year with $3.7 billion being allocated to police, $853 million to the courts, and $3.1 billion to corrections.” (Austin 5). If possession of this plant was not a criminal offense, the amount of work and money being put into enforcement and processing tasks will drastically reduce, saving the government tons of money. Many anti-marijuana advocates believe that decriminalization will result in greater use of the drug. One out of ten US residents use marijuana at least once a year and 47% of all adults have tried marijuana at least once (Duncan). If almost half the country has tried this illegal drug, greater use of this drug should be the least of concerns. Although there are no proven facts that decriminalizing it will reduce the use of this drug, there are also no proven facts that it will result in greater use of the drug.
One of the most controversial claims about marijuana is that although marijuana itself may not cause significant harm, it serves as a “gateway” drug. This means that using marijuana can lead to users abusing newer and stronger drugs. Although many anti-marijuana advocates support this claim, it has not been scientifically validated. “Moreover, the observations and data supporting the gateway hypothesis do not permit a distinction between marijuana as a direct cause of later drug use and a simple association of marijuana's use with later behavior” (Cohen). In conclusion, the philosophy of marijuana being a “gateway” drug is false and unproven.
There is also this theory about how decriminalizing this drug will result in higher crime rates. I can see where the anti-marijuana advocates are coming from on this but this can also work both ways. It is a well known fact that most criminals have tried an illegal drug. Their logic for ‘the drug use will cause crime’ argument is that since there are so many criminals that have tried illegal drugs; they believe that the crimes they committed were due to those illegal drugs. Their argument is like saying water must be the reason for their crimes because all criminals have consumed water in their lifetime. Marijuana should not be related to any kind of committed crimes because it is neither a gateway drug nor one that necessarily propels one to criminal activity. The number of marijuana related arrests has grown significantly in the past decade. “In 1970 there was an estimated 188,682 arrests for the drug – by 2003 the number had increased to 755,000” (De La Mater). Although, it is clear that marijuana arrests have risen in the 30 years, vast majority of these arrests are for possession. These kinds of arrests are just a waste of time and money. Many prisons are slowly letting inmates get out early because prisons are becoming too crowded. Decriminalizing marijuana will drastically reduce all of this, which will save the government billions of dollars.
It is quite evident that decriminalizing marijuana will have an overall positive impact on the country. Hopefully the anti-marijuana advocates will understand and accept this compromise until we learn more about this plant and its side effects. Decriminalization is the first step to the government making billions of dollars, which they could be using for other productive things. I believe now is the best time for decriminalization of marijuana because of the recession this country is already facing. There are also no proven health effects from marijuana, which only makes decriminalization make more sense. Doctors are already giving out medical marijuana cards to help patients with different kinds of diseases. It is time to open our eyes and realize the benefits of decriminalizing marijuana.
Austin, James. "Rethinking the Consequences of Decriminalizing Marijuana." NORML.org. 2 Nov. 2005. Web. 18 Mar. 2010.
Cohen, Peter. "Medical Marijuana: The Conflict Between Scientific Evidence and Political Ideology." Academic Search Complete. EBSCO, 2009. Web. 7 Apr. 2010.
De La Mater, Benning. "US MA: Use of Marijuana a Hot Topic, With Ballot Question Possible." Media Awareness Project. Jan. 2008. Web. 18 Mar. 2010.
Duncan, Cynthia. "The Need for Change: An Economic Analysis of Marijuana Policy." Wilson Web. Wilson Web, 2009. Web. 18 Mar. 2010.
Hall, Wayne. "The Adverse Health Effects of Cannabis Use: What Are They, and What Are Their Implications for Policy?" Academic Search Complete. EBSCO, Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Apr. 2010.
Bibek, you've done a nice job with this paper. This is one of the more Rogerian approaches to this topic that I've seen; you seem genuinely concerned with exploring both sides, and you support both sides with strong research. However, I'd still like to see you present some of that evidence more effectively. Whenever possible, paraphrase statistics rather than quoting them--the audience wants to hear your voice directly. And avoid dropped quotes--in a few places, you include a quotation without introducing it or incorporating the source. In your Works Cited list, you have three seemingly impressive sources, but you need to include the names of the journals as well, not just the article titles and the databases. Finally, that first paragraph is quite long. I think it would be more effective if you were to break it up, perhaps presenting the history of marijuana elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason I'm not seeing my comments show up on your second draft. I did read that draft, but if you didn't receive my feedback, please let me know, and I'll give you a chance to revise again if you wish.
Overall, good job.