The debate over the prohibition of marijuana has been ongoing for years, but with 16 states and D.C. now declaring medicinal marijuana legal, the tides are turning. Recently, California has put into action a new act titled The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act of 2012 to be voted on in the next election season. Marijuana reform has become such a wide debate for many reasons, including personal freedoms, medicinal benefits, and states’ rights. The federal government has had possession of cannabis outlawed since 1937 after every state had made the same decision, so across the land marijuana was illegal. Since then there has been a war on drugs which has mainly focused on cannabis, this is where the main conflict of states’ rights and federal law has come from. The main positions of the legalization of marijuana are for or against; it barely varies between recreational use and medicinal use against complete outlaw of it. The main reason people are against the legalization of marijuana is because the issue doesn’t affect them one way or the other so often there aren’t compromises. Within those who are for legalization, it varies more widely, some are for full legalization where adults may use marijuana at their own whim, to legalization and regulation similar to wine regulations, to legalization for strictly medicinal use. For my purposes we will only be discussing regulation of marijuana like wine, as the act proposes.
The two articles about this specific issue are from Cannabis Culture: Marijuana Magazine and Newsreview.com. The former, Battle of the Marijuana Bills: Why 'Regulate' is Better Than 'Repeal', discusses the Californian act as opposed to another similar act, The Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012(RCP), and the diffe...
... middle of paper ...
... News and Events. 08 Sept. 2011. Web. 05 Oct. 2011. .
"Legalize.org » History of Cannabis Prohibition." Legalize.org. 2005. Web. 05 Oct. 2011. .
Malmo-Levine, David. "Battle of the Marijuana Bills: Why 'Regulate' Is Better Than 'Repeal' | Cannabis Culture Magazine." Cannabis Culture Magazine | Marijuana Magazine. 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 05 Oct. 2011. .
"Regulate Marijuana Like Wine | The Initiative." Regulate Marijuana Like Wine | By REGULATING Marijuana the Economy Can Sustain Growth, Improve Safety and Sustain Industry Development. Web. 05 Oct. 2011. .
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
In January of 1919, the 18th amendment, the prohibition of alcohol, was ratified due to progressive movements. It was soon repealed in 1933, when crime increased and issues spread throughout the country. The concept of “gangsters” was established and unsafe alcohol became apart of America’s diet. This problem is now evident in this country today. Marijuana, an all natural plant that is known to get someone “high,” or to alter the state of mind, has been illegal since 1937 when the Marijuana Tax Act was put into action. But, this has caused problems throughout the country, just like the prohibition of alcohol. Making marijuana illegal has affected the social and cultural aspects of America negatively, by increasing the crime rate, making our country somewhat unhealthier, and weakening the economy.
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.
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...
Cannabis, since its discovery, has been used for recreational and medical purposes. It was seen as a drug that was “safe” and did put the body at risk but benefited it. However, this is not the case anymore because the government under I Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970 law banned the use of the narcotic and has the right to persecute anyone who attains the substance. Nonetheless, the question is not whether the drug is “safe” to use but whether the States should have the power to regulate marijuana or the federal government should continue having the control over the drug. Since 1996, 23 states including Washington D.C have passed laws that have legalized the medical use of marijuana, yet the federal government does not protect or even recognize the rights of users or possessors. The debate over marijuana has picked up momentum and many would agree that all this uprising conflict can be traced back to the constitution and the flaws it presents. The constitution is blamed for not properly distributing the States and Federal powers. Although the federal government currently holds supremacy over marijuana, States should have the power to regulate the drug because under the 10th amendment the federal government only has those powers specifically granted in the constitution, Likewise the States have the right to trade within their own state under the Commerce Clause.
Beckett, K. & Herbert, S., (N.D.), The consequences and costs of marijuana prohibition. Retrieved from: https://aclu-wa.org/library_files/BeckettandHerbert.pdf
Benson, Adam. "Brandeis U.: EDITORIAL: Recent ballot measures indicate need to legalize marijuana." America's Intelligence Wire 12 Nov. 2002. General OneFile. Web. 12 Oct. 2010.
In our society today, a big debate has emerged. People are squabbling, arguing, deliberating and discussing on whether Marijuana should be legalized. In the United States, this debate is amplified because people think that illegalizing the substance does not fight its illicit use but only makes it more available and easily accessible. It also makes it “as a cool recreation drug” (Pi, 2007) for the young people. “It is actually easier for many high school students to obtain Marijuana than it is for them to obtain alcohol, because alcohol is legal and therefore regulated to keep it away from kids” (Marijuana, 1999). Debate about legalization of the drug is a significant issue that is socially important to our community and it should be analytically discussed in length. I personally believe that legalizing the drug across the United States of America would help fight its usage and save us a lot of cash (Marijuana, 1999).
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.
Marijuana—a prominently used, yet widely opposed substance. Marijuana usage has been and is an immensely debated subject within the states. Many liberal states favor the drug due to its economic and medicinal values. However, many conservative states abhor the narcotic due to its psychoactive effects on the brain and its minimal medicinal value. These anti-marijuana fans emphasize the drug’s relation to the usage of more potent substances such as cocaine. Overall, there is high tension between those who advocate the drug versus those who protest against it. Economically, taxation on marijuana provides a supplemental income to the state that results in a higher budget for the states’ respective governments; medicinally, the narcotic eases pain for terminally ill patients and alleviates the sense of disorientation. Furthermore, the drug has less harmful effects to the body in comparison to tobacco and alcohol; therefore, the legalization of the previous two should justify the legalization of marijuana. Marijuana’s pros exceed its cons and thus, the substance’s legalization is justifiable.
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...
The legalization of marijuana is considered a controversial issue, something that can benefit people for medical purposes, but what about recreationally? Marijuana has been illegal since 1937, but there’s never been a bigger push for legalization. There are several reasons why it is illegal, because of government propaganda and big industry not wanting to lose money, but this will be discussed later. The purpose of this paper is to educate, theorize, and discuss various aspects of marijuana, such as its history, development, and the advantages and disadvantages of marijuana legalization. Finally, my personal reflection on legalization and marijuana in general will be discussed.
Today more and more people are deciding to side with the legalization of the substance, for America. For those who never give the legalization of marijuana a time of day or those who are hesitant on giving it a chance, are now starting to believe that the legalization of the substance would ultimately be helpful for the United States. As always, with every subject that rises up in the United States, there are people that are for the subject and also others that are against the subject. The legalization of Marijuana throughout the entire U.S. is one of the largest controversial arguments between both people and federal officers. As wrote in LegalizationOfMarijuana, “Prohibition must be weighed against the loss of personal freedom. Countries
These facts are indefensible. But even more terrible is that fact that there are many medicinal benefits of marijuana that are being denied to hundreds of thousands of patients yearly. Prohibition of marijuana for recreational use is an idiotic policy, but the prohibition for medicinal marijuana is completely iniquitous. In this paper I will focus on the prohibition of medical marijuana. I will start with a little background on the history of medical marijuana and on the medicinal properties of marijuana. I will then move on to discuss the history of legislation for marijuana in general, and then specifically medical pot. The current legislation will also be examined. I will conclude with potential policy options, and ways to help fight this injustice.
Legalization of Marijuana has quickly become a controversial issue in America. In the United States, legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes is spreading to the state level. For example, in November 1996, the people of California and Arizona voted to legalize marijuana for medicinal reasons. As a result of Proposition 215 in California, patients now smoke marijuana provided their physician recommends its usage. A prescription is not required, and marijuana continues to be illegal to prescribe. The Clinton administration responded that it “would not recognize these decisions, and would prosecute physicians who recommend or provide marijuana to their patients.” Although California and Arizona are the only two states to have already passed laws regulating marijuana usage, twenty-six states and the District of Columbia have laws and resolutions regarding marijuana usage. These laws and resolutions range from establishing therapeutic research programs, to allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana, to asking the federal government to lift the ban. Despite the states’ desires to have marijuana legalized for medicinal purposes, the US National Institutes of Health examined all existing clinical evidence about smoked marijuana and concluded that, “There is no scientifically sound evidence that smoked marijuana is medically superior to currently available therapies.”