Legalization of Marijuana

Should Marijuana be Legalized?

Citizens of the United States have long asked themselves whether or not marijuana should be legalized. Marijuana has benefits and disadvantages which lend it to being a controversial topic for the government. Those in favor and those in opposition of legalization alike, put quite a bit of pressure on the government for resolution on the issue. Today in the United States and most parts of the western world (like Britain, Canada, and France) marijuana is illegal to possess or distribute (although in Canada possession has been decriminalized). Penalties in the United States for possessing marijuana differ from state to state but are generally severe: a hefty fine at the least to several months or even years in prison, depending on the amount of marijuana found. (Schwartz pp. 53–65) Many professionals have dedicated hours of research and sometimes their entire careers towards gathering information about Marijuana. For centuries the marijuana plant has been used in medicinal and spiritual journeys. Looking into even ancient history, much text accounts of the use of the marijuana plant in cultural activities. People around the globe have used the plant as part of cultural rites of passage, as an aid to meditation or purely recreationally as a social stimulant. Marijuana could potentially be very useful in the field of medicine. (Kreit, 683-685) Effects of marijuana have been known to cause pain relief. Marijuana was used as an anesthetic in many countries. Marijuana smokers reported that marijuana had relieved pain while smoking and a much higher tolerance to pain after smoking. In particular, marijuana helps relieve the tension in a headache because of its effect on the brain. (Doblin & Kleiman, pp. 1313–1319) It also helps with anxiety because it can be used as a sedative. Studies have shown that marijuana can also be used as a Bronchodilator. It can help relieve feelings of suffocation during an asthma attack. Many people who smoked marijuana also reported that it helps relieve bronchial congestion of a cold. Marijuana has also been known to relieve nausea. In Cancer Chemotherapy Marijuana has been discovered to increase appetite, slow down weight loss, and relieve nausea (Earleywine pp. 681-699). One of the strongest arguments in favor of decriminalizing marijuana includes the medicinal usage of marijuana. Many people can benefit from the use of marijuana, from AIDS patients who are too sick to eat, to people suffering from migraines or insomnia. Denying terminally ill patients a drug that could potentially help them and ease their pain is vindictive and inhumane. Inhaled marijuana could be considered a much more efficient medicine than the THC pill, Marinol. At least with smoking marijuana patients can control their dosage and stop when they have reached a sufficient high. As for AIDS patients whose main trouble is nausea and loss of appetite, taking the pill may in it induce vomiting, or just put they right to sleep, defeating the whole purpose of it. Lastly, each capsule of Marinol costs $10 or more, when used as recommended that is over $1,000 per week. In comparison, marijuana grown naturally is much less expensive. (Goode pp. 53–65) Arguments against the legalization of marijuana state that labs have also produced a drug called Marinol that acts the same way THC does. Marinol, generically known as dronabinol, is a highly concentrated formulation of delta-9-THC, one of the many active forms of THC found in marijuana. (Kreit, 683-685)There are over 20 active forms of THC in marijuana and Marinol is only one of them. Natural marijuana also contains many other non-psychoactive ingredients which help to dilute the full force of pure THC. (Alexander, pp. 103-124) The government is missing out on a very lucrative cash crop. At this time the largest cash crop in the United States is corn, grossing 19 billion dollars annually. Marijuana has the potential to gross nearly 25 billion dollars annually. It is no secret that organized crime is one of the biggest profiteers. (Foltin et al. pp. 573–582) This source of untaxed income is just adding to the wealth and power of organized crime. If it were to become legal, the price would go down, it would eventually be off the black market and organized crime would lose that source of income. If marijuana were to become legal there would be a huge industrial boom, a lot more room in our prisons for malicious prisoners, a lot more happier and comfortable patients, and a lot more happier people. (Kreit, 683-685) On the other hand, opponents of legalization argue that if marijuana is legalized, the impact it would have on the healthcare infrastructure of the nation would be devastating. This would reverse all benefits gained from the sales of marijuana in the form of taxes. (Hollister pp. 44–49) The next largest disagreement pertaining to the legalization of marijuana is whether it is a gateway drug (one leading to other drugs such as cocaine and heroin) and if smoking in general is harmful, why should it be done at all? The idea of a gateway drug is basically a drug that would, if used, lead to the use of other more harmful drugs. If someone doesn’t believe marijuana is harmful, could they possibly be against it’s legalization simply by the assumption it could lead to harder drug use? Pro-legalization activists argue that it has never been proven as a gateway drug, and asks the public to consider this. There have been no studies of marijuana smoking leading to harder drugs, and that statement is based on opinion. As for the health issues inherent in inhaling smoke into the lungs, is it the government’s job to watch over our bodies? Should the government watch over us as if we were children, telling what is ok for us to do to ourselves? (Kreit, 683-685) As to the effects of alcohol versus marijuana, there is no comparison. Most claims by anti-legalization are that when one is in an inebriated state with marijuana it is the same as alcohol, with a loss of coordination and reaction time. This would make activities like driving dangerous. (Schwartz pp. 53–65) The actual effects of marijuana are less of a loss of motor skills than that of alcohol, but alcohol is legal. Drunk drivers are ten times as dangerous as a stoned driver, since smoking tends to relax and elevate mood while drinking drives up testosterone and pushes drinkers to perform stunts that they normally wouldn’t in a sober state. In contrast, a person “high” on marijuana is still aware of the consequences of their actions and tends to make better judgment calls. (Benson & Watson, pp. 67-70) There are many arguments against the legalization of marijuana, that would state it is dangerous and addictive. It is considered a “gateway” drug which means that once a user stops getting high off it, or becomes bored, then they will move on to other more dangerous drugs. 20% of all people who tested positive for marijuana use also tested positive for other dangerous drugs. The risk of using cocaine is 104 times greater with the use of marijuana. Since it also lowers inhibitions it is more likely to make bad decisions. (Benson & Watson, pp. 67-70) If the government legalizes marijuana, then children will assume it is a safe drug and want to try it. They will see it as widely accepted and appropriate to use so they won’t think twice about it when someone offers it to them at a party. (Hollister pp. 44–49) Marijuana impairs the person’s vision and ability to drive and think clearly. It also elongates the person’s reaction time. These kids will think they are okay to drive then get into a car where they could potentially kill themselves or someone else. (Benson & Watson, pp. 67-70) Marijuana has both benefits than disadvantages, and therefore arguments from pro-legalization and against-legalization of marijuana are very convincing. The decision to legalize marijuana might bring in both good and bad aspects of this decision to the masses, which the government might want to avoid. However, no matter how hard the government tries, there are even more people than ever using marijuana. The decision lies with the government if marijuana should be legalized or not, as they represent the masses of the country.

Works Cited
Alexander, Dale; A Marijuana Screening Inventory (Experimental Version): Description and Preliminary Psychometric Properties Journal article American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, Vol. 29, 2003 pp. 103-124.
Benson, J.A. and Watson, S.J., (2001) . Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base National Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC. pp. 67-70.
Doblin, R.E. and Kleiman, M.A.R., (2003). Marijuana as anathematic medicine; A Survey of oncologist’s experiences and attitudes. J. Clin. Oncol. 9, pp. 1313–1319.
Earleywine, Mitch; Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence Book Oxford University Press, 2002 pp. 681-699.
Foltin, R.W., Brady, J.V. and Fischman, M., (2001). Behavioral analysis of marijuana effect on food I intake in normalcy. Pharmacology. Biochem. Behav. 25, pp. 573–582.
Goode, Erich; (2006) Marijuana as medicine. A plea for reconsideration. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 273, pp. 1875–1876.
Hollister, L.E., (2001). Hunger and appetite after single doses of marijuana, alcohol and amphetamine. Clin. Pharmacology. There. 12, pp. 44–49.
Kreit, Alex; (2003) The Future of Medical Marijuana: Should the States Grow Their Own? Journal article University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 151, 683-685.
Schwartz, R.H., (2000). Marijuana as an anathematic drug: How useful is it today? Opinions from clinical oncologists. J. Addict. Dis. 13 1, pp. 53–65.

Cited: Alexander, Dale; A Marijuana Screening Inventory (Experimental Version): Description and Preliminary Psychometric Properties Journal article American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, Vol. 29, 2003 pp. 103-124. Benson, J.A. and Watson, S.J., (2001) . Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base National Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC. pp. 67-70. Doblin, R.E. and Kleiman, M.A.R., (2003). Marijuana as anathematic medicine; A Survey of oncologist’s experiences and attitudes. J. Clin. Oncol. 9, pp. 1313–1319. Earleywine, Mitch; Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence Book Oxford University Press, 2002 pp. 681-699. Foltin, R.W., Brady, J.V. and Fischman, M., (2001). Behavioral analysis of marijuana effect on food I intake in normalcy. Pharmacology. Biochem. Behav. 25, pp. 573–582. Goode, Erich; (2006) Marijuana as medicine. A plea for reconsideration. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 273, pp. 1875–1876. Hollister, L.E., (2001). Hunger and appetite after single doses of marijuana, alcohol and amphetamine. Clin. Pharmacology. There. 12, pp. 44–49. Kreit, Alex; (2003) The Future of Medical Marijuana: Should the States Grow Their Own? Journal article University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 151, 683-685. Schwartz, R.H., (2000). Marijuana as an anathematic drug: How useful is it today? Opinions from clinical oncologists. J. Addict. Dis. 13 1, pp. 53–65.