In the 2015 article “What will Federal Marijuana Reform Look Like?”, Alex Kreit states how the current stance towards marijuana has changed. For this reason, a need for a new policy is necessary, as the present strategy of implementing laws on federal marijuana prohibition is no longer sustainable. This shift of mindset towards legalization of marijuana leads Kreit to say that legalization is inevitable. As an illustration, in 1996, the Drug Enforcement Administration and Congress opposed California’s approval of medical marijuana. In contrast, the year 2013 was when the Department of Justice announced new guidance to deprioritize enforcement of marijuana laws. Because of this shift, Kreit propose that efforts should go to crafting marijuana …show more content…
He is working on the premise that marijuana legalization is certain and prohibitionists are better off being on board. Be that as it may, his weak points in his argument fail to convince those oppose legalization. While Kreit says he only wishes to further the discussion and does not want to back a certain solution, his paper favors two proposals, namely federal regulation of marijuana and states opting out through waiver programs. Furthermore, Kreit thinks these are better options than current voter friendly approaches. Although this may be true, his background and his bias as a law practitioner show he favors these options. In practicality, it is hard to convince a politician whose electorate is wary of marijuana. A point often overlooked is that the swing in opinion by some does equate to a shift for …show more content…
With the floodgates open, it would be impractical and unsafe to deal with millions of dollars in cash. Under these circumstances, the implementation of a new and separate banking system is necessary, as the existing global financial institution will not be willing to go against international money laundering laws. Conclusion Kreit is putting the onus of federal marijuana regulations to the legalization opponents, but his argument might not be enough to convince them to join in crafting the laws. Prohibitionists, particularly politicians, are fearful of the backlash from the voters once they saw flyers and posters near school grounds. Additionally, the US will have a hard time navigating around international uproar and possible condemnation if this legalization pushes thru. Alex Kreit might succeed to open the dialogue on federal marijuana regulation, but it is doubtful those who oppose marijuana will even be
The US has a sophisticated banking system that does a good job of allocating resources in productive place for their customers. However, in an area such as investment banking companies can use the deposited money for risky investments such as foreign government and corporate bonds. When these banks lose money on their investments or go out of business, all of the customer 's savings would be gone. Also, in this type of system bankers are more likely to commit fraud such as opening fake accounts vis a vis Wells
... banks in a time where the entire population is in a downfall is not a wise choice.
Jessica Corry’s Article “Republican moms for marijuana: ‘Time to legalize is now’ discusses the positive effects of the legalization of marijuana, which is very much a controversial topic right now. She argues that since the majority of Americans want it then the Government should make it so, instead of going with their ideas of what Americans want. However, Jessica Corry’s argument is ineffective due to the fact of the ethos, logos, pathos and lack of organization.
The controversy of legalizing marijuana has been raging for quite a while in America. From some people pushing it for medical purposes to potheads just wanting to get high legally. Marijuana has been used for years as a popular drug for people who want to get a high. All this time it has been illegal and now it looks as if the drug may become legal. There has been heated debate by many sides giving there opinion in the issue. These people are not only left wing liberals either. Richard Brookhiser, a National Review Senior editor is openly supportive of medical marijuana yet extremely conservative in his writing for National Review (Brookhiser 27). He is for medical marijuana since he used it in his battle with testicular cancer. He says "I turned to [marijuana] when I got cancer because marijuana gives healthy people an appetite, and prevents people who are nauseated from throwing up. "(Brookhiser 27) Cancer patients are not the only benefactors from the appetite enhancer in marijuana, but so are any other nauseous people. Arizona and California have already passed a law allowing marijuana to be used as a medicinal drug. Fifty Six percent of the California voters voted for this law. "We've sent a message to Washington," says Dennis Peron. "They've had 25 years of this drug was, and they've only made things worse." (Simmons 111) The Arizona proposition garnished an even wider margin of separation between the fore's an against in a sixty five percent support tally. Ethan Nadelmann insists that " these propositions are not about legalization or decriminalization. They're about initiating some non radical, commonsense approaches to drug policy." General Barry McCaffery disagrees saying, "I...
in Colorado and Washington as not only medicinal, but recreational use. They have also begun
The legalization of marijuana is, and has been a heavily disputed issue for decades. On one hand, marijuana could lead to a medical breakthrough, or at least provide relief to cancer and AIDS patients. On the other hand, legalizing a drug could expose it to too broad an audience. As a drug, marijuana has never proven to be anywhere near as harmful as cigarettes or alcohol. Each year in the United States, 400,000 people die from tobacco, 50,000 from alcohol, and from marijuana, zero. Regardless of what side one may take to this argument, there are some causes to this marijuana debate that everyone should know. Marijuana was not always illegal, and the reasons behind the history of narcotic regulation are interesting when viewed from today's perspective. The history of marijuana prohibition is a story of racism, political repression, and poorly represents the qualities this country claims to embody.
Lately it seems that drug policy and the war on drugs has been in the headlines quite a lot. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies that the United States government takes against illegal drugs are coming into question. The mainstream media is catching on to the message of organizations and individuals who have long been considered liberal "Counter Culture" supporters. The marijuana question seems to be the most prevalent and pressed of the drugs and issues that are currently being addressed. The messages of these organizations and individuals include everything from legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, to full-unrestricted legalization of the drug. Of course, the status quo of vote seeking politicians and conservative policy makers has put up a strong resistance to this "new" reform lobby. The reasons for the resistance to the changes in drug policies are multiple and complex. The issues of marijuana’s possible negative effects, its use as a medical remedy, the criminality of distribution and usage, and the disparity in the enforcement of current drug laws have all been brought to a head and must be addressed in the near future. It is apparent that it would be irresponsible and wrong for the government to not evaluate it’s current general drug policies and perhaps most important, their marijuana policy. With the facts of racial disparity in punishment, detrimental effects, fiscal strain and most importantly, the history of the drug, the government most certainly must come to the conclusion that they must, at the very least, decriminalize marijuana use and quite probably fully legalize it.
Ever since marijuana’s introduction to the United States of America in 1611, controversy of the use and legalization of the claimed-to-be Schedule I drug spread around the nation. While few selective states currently allow marijuana’s production and distribution, the remaining states still skepticize the harmlessness and usefulness of this particular drug; therefore, it remains illegal in the majority of the nation. The government officials and citizens of the opposing states believe the drug creates a threat to citizens due to its “overly-harmful” effects mentally and physically and offers no alternate purposes but creating troublesome addicts hazardous to society; however, they are rather misinformed about marijuana’s abilities. While marijuana has a small amount of negligible effects to its users, the herbal drug more importantly has remarkable health benefits, and legalizing one of the oldest and most commonly known drugs would redirect America’s future with the advantages outweighing the disadvantages.
The legalization of marijuana has been a highly debated topic for many of years. Since the first president to the most recent, our nation’s leaders have consumed the plant known as weed. With such influential figures openly using this drug why is it so frowned upon? Marijuana is considered a gateway drug, a menace to society, and mentally harmful to its consumers. For some people weed brings a sense of anxiety, dizziness, or unsettling feeling. Like alcohol, tobacco or any other drug, those chemicals may not respond well with their body. For other people marijuana brings joy, a sense of relief, and takes the edge off of every day stress. For those who are associated with cannabis, purposes usually range from a relaxant, or cash crop, to more permissible uses such as medicine, and ingredient to make so many other materials. We now need to look at what would change if marijuana were legal. Benefits to the economy and agriculture, health issues, and crime rates are three areas worth looking at. Deliberating on the pros and cons of this plant we can get a better understanding for marijuana. From there it will be easier to make a clear consensus on what is best for the nation.
Abramsky then goes on to discuss in the article how liberal politicians, Betty Yee and Tom Ammiano, are pushing for a bill to change the drug laws and legalize marijuana. Yee wants to excise “fees on business owners applying for marijuana licenses, impose an excise tax on sellers and charge buyers a sales tax” and if that is done the right way, she believes that the state could gain “about $1.3 billion a year” Timothy Lynch, writing in the conservative magazine the National Review, writes about how the drug war has not made very much progress and has essentially failed. Lynch writes about how voters in California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Alaska, and Maine that have rejected ideas to improve the war on drugs and instead they “approved initiatives calling for the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes” (40). Lynch also writes that “the supply of drugs has not been hampered in any serious way by the war on drugs” (41).
In determining the ethicality of legalizing marijuana, it is necessary to understand the background of the issue, and to identify the most important stakeholders. In the 1930s, many states began outlawing the substance; ironically California was the first of these states (Rendon). In 1937, the federal government outlawed the substance, which pushed the growth and sale underground (Rendon). In 1970, President Nixon declared the substance a Schedule I Substance, which indicates that the substance has “a high potential for abuse” and “no currently accepted medical use” (Controlled Substances Act). The federal government has specified that for marijuana to have an accepted medical use, it must “be subjected to the same rigorous clinical trials and scientific scrutiny that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) applies to all other new medications” ("Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Marijuana"). There are numerous stakeholders in an ethical dilemma of this magnitude, which...
Millions of people are suffering needlessly because of the prohibition against using medical marijuana, Rosenthal and Kubby assert. They conclude that marijuana should be decriminalized. ”(Rosenthal, Kubby) Today, I am going to help you understand the real benefits of marijuana. By the time that we are through, you will be agreeing with me and will want to be a part of the effort needed by citizens to legalize such a beneficial drug.
Many groups of people use money laundering today, and many ways exist to launder money. Money laundering has become more sophisticated over the years. It is much different then when Al Capone laundered his bootleg profits. The United States is doing what they can to combat this illegal activity but without the help of others it is an impossible task. Many countries have teamed up with the Unites States to help. The only way to truly combat it is to persuade the other countries to develop anti-laundering standards. Along with developing these standards, banks need to train their staff on how to catch different transactions and policies to catch money laundering. Because laundering is so easy in these less developed countries laundering will continue, and while this illegal activity continues the activity itself will continue to destroy the economy in which it exists.
Many researchers have pointed out that the global imbalances are the root of the recent financial crisis. Portes claims that “the underlying problem in international finance over the past decade has been global imbalances, not greed, poor incentive structures, or weak financial regulation, however egregious and important these may be.” (2). According to him, the global imbalances lead to “the increasing in dispersion of current account”, which “puts a burden on financial systems to intermediate.”
When I think about social issues that should be discussed more often than they are, I think about the topic of legalization of marijuana. As a person that has consumed marijuana both in legal settings, and illegal settings, I can say that the title “illegal drug” should not apply to cannabis. The reason that I believe this is because I do not feel that marijuana is a threat to my personal safety, nor is it a threat to the safety of people that are around me if I was to be smoking it in their vicinity. I am not a violent person, and do not consider myself to be a criminal based on what plants I have smoked. While I believe that cannabis should be legalized in every way, there are some people that sit on the fence on the issue. The problem is that they either don’t know enough about marijuana to make an informed decision or do not have any personal feelings on the matter. I believe that these people should consider choosing a side. I believe that this particular paper can show the injustices of marijuana laws and why they provide unnecessary hurdles for hardworking citizens that want nothing more than to be given their right to get “high” after a long day of work. Everyone should know more about the topic because it is more than likely that someone they know will be adversely affected by the unjust system of laws that govern American society. This paper will provide all the information that a reader needs to make an informed decision, including a history of the cannabis plant, and biased and unbiased information regarding the topic and why law reform is the only conceivable solution to the debate over marijuana.