Legalization Of Marijuana Essay, Research Paper
Within the foibles of about any sociomedical analysis of our assorted modern-day wellness quandary, there exists the issue of marihuana and the contention environing its use and its legalisation. Indeed, scientific surveies have done nil less than proven that & # 8220 ; occasional usage & # 8221 ; of marihuana poses no greater a menace to the human organic structure than does similar use and measures of intoxicant. While the long-run wellness effects of marijuana-smoking are reminiscent of what we know to be the hazards of chronic coffin nail tobacco users, there exists virtually no scientific informations nor significant statement which warrants the care of marihuana as an illegal substance in the United States. In Weiss & A ; Mirin & # 8217 ; s book, Marijuana, the writers efficaciously recount the history of marijuana-laws in this state. Mentioning specifically how the drug was foremost a needed merchandise whose growing was mandated on American farms, she illustratively brings readers into the 19th and 20th centuries where marihuana was originally legal, widely-used and still well-looked upon. Apparently, the societal debasement of marihuanas began when Texas constabulary officers associated violent offenses and assorted other societal delinquencies with the drug. This was a flicker that started a fire which by the 1920 & # 8217 ; s and 30 & # 8217 ; s had grown so big it gave marijuana a repute definitive of the conversational term, & # 8220 ; killer weed. & # 8221 ; ( Weiss & A ; Mirin, 1986 ) . Looking back over history, I find it virtually astonishing that the contention of marijuana & # 8217 ; s legalisation has non ended with its full indorsement. We continue to populate in a societal lip service ; intoxicant and baccy are legal while an tantamount substance is non. From the intoxicant prohibition which took topographic point earlier this century, we should hold well-learned that such censoring merely creates more jobs. Similar to the consequences of socially ruinous consequences of prohibition ; marijuana delegalization has led merely to more pertinent offenses and to the being of a big, illegal black market. The lone difference in this instance, is that after prohibition we learned ; intoxicant became legal once more because it created more corruptness when it was non so. Unfortunately, marijuana has non yet been legalized partly because it still carries with it such inexorable negative societal stereotypes which are reinforced by a black market. If it were legalized, marijuana & # 8217 ; s consequence would be no different than the legalisation of intoxicant and our society would be better off with respect to a overplus of elaborate ethical and economic facets. Curiously plenty, the United States Government has theoretically accepted the usage of marihuana for an highly fringy group of users: AIDS patients. With the assorted illustrations of sick persons cited in Bob Batz & # 8217 ; s recent article, an statement is basically made that those who are terminal, & # 8220 ; have nil to lose. & # 8221 ; While this may non be as a sound, cosmopolitan statement for the legalisation of marihuana, it does in my sentiment, illustrate one of the many pathetic societal sarcasms environing the state of affairs: the authorities is willing to prove and to experiment with a drug that we already know all about and are allegedly so steadfastly against. ( Batz, 1994 ) . Factually, there is no existent instance against marijuana & # 8217 ; s legalisation. In Elizabeth Neus & # 8217 ; s article, Bill Grigg is quoted as stating that, & # 8220 ; no surveies indicated that smoked marihuanas had any benefit over sanctioned medicative purposes. & # 8221 ; But so once more, no surveies indicated that it harmed anyone either. True, it is argued that patients with diseases such as AIDS hazard pneumonia and other disease-upsetting symptoms when they smoke, but that is if they smoke any substance. They are still lawfully allowed to smoke coffin nails, so why should they non be allowed to smoke marihuana ; a substance which my articles report & # 8220 ; has a numbing consequence on their condition. & # 8221 ; ( Batz, 1994 ) . The media argues that & # 8220 ; kids who smoke marihuanas are far more likely than those who dont to seek harder drugs. & # 8221 ; So? In my sentiment, that is all the more ground to experiment more to the full with the legalisation of marihuana. After all, those surveies were done in a society were marihuanas is illegal. Therefore, it exists in the same societal class as much & # 8220 ; harder & # 8221 ; , more unsafe drugs such as cocaine. Legalizing the usage of marihuana surely will non decline the state of affairs. If anything at all, it will maintain respectable users with unity from being forced to affect themselves in the & # 8220 ; black market & # 8221 ; and high-danger societal scenes which they must frequently patronize to obtain marihuanas. With specific respect to immature kids, they would non be allowed ( minimal age=21 ) to utilize marijuana any manner so legalisation would non needfully have any negative nor any positive consequence on other pertinent hereafter determinations in their life. Many provinces have allowed physicians to order marihuana for all kinds of hurting stand-ins ; including its prescription as a positive assistance for chemotherapy patients to assist them halt emesis among other things. Ironically, even these utilizations have created great contention. ( Arnold, 1991 ) . But where is all of the contention about legalising marihuanas coming from? Why is at that place any statement at all? In one article which I researched, a canvass revealed that merely 38 out of 1282 people were against the legalisation of marihuana. I, obviously am non one of those 38 sheltered persons. ( Hunt, 1994 ) . Ironically I, ( and likely many other subscribers of marijuana legalisation ) have perfectly ne’er even experimented with the drug in my life. I have no desire to utilize marihuana either. Rather, I maintain my desire to utilize common sense. The lone statements against marihuanas are the obvious wellness effects which are similar to smoke and the irrelevant belief that it influences the usage of harder drugs. If we are so concerned over lung disease, we should censor coffin nails as good. But of class, there is excessively much money in the baccy industry for that to of all time go on. There is in fact, more pertinent informations, showing the ill-effects of baccy coffin nails than there of marihuana. ( Neus, 1994 ) . The latter is non even habit-forming! Clearly, the clip has come for our authorities to recognize the socioeconomic necessity of a marihuana industry ; the drug helps terminal patients, harms no 1 any more ( frequently less ) than many other legal substances and presently brings more offense and problem as an illegal substance in a black market than it of all time could if it were lawfully sold in shops. Bibliography Anderson, Edward F. Peyote: The Divine Cactus. Arizona, 1980. Arnold, David. Legal Medical Use of Marijuana Sought. Boston Globe. September 8, 1991 ; P. 35. Batz, Bob Jr. , For AIDS Patients, Medicinal ( Bot Legal ) Marijuana. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ; November 22, 1994. Hunt, Linda. Reader Feedback. Boston Globe. September 15, 1994 ; P. 19. Hyde, Margaret O. and others. Mind Drugs. McGraw, 1981. Dodd, 5th ed. , 1986.
Lazear, Mindi. Marijuana and Contemporary America. Free Press, 1982. Neus, Elizabeth. Medicinal Pot Crowd now Looks to Republicans. Gannett News Service. November 13, 1994. Weiss, Roger D. and Mirin, Steven M. Marijuana. American Psychiatric
Press, >> —————–Forwarded Message: Subj: Re: PAPER —12000papers.com Order FormDate: 99-05-09 22:29:32 EDTFrom: [email protected] (Heather Todd)To: [email protected] Within the idiosyncrasies of almost any sociomedicalanalysis of our various contemporary health dilemmas,there exists the issue of marijuana and the controversysurrounding its usage and its legalization. Indeed,scientific studies have done nothing less than proven that”occasional use” of marijuana poses no greater a threat tothe human body than does similar usage and quantities ofalcohol. While the long-term health effects ofmarijuana-smoking are reminiscent of what we know to bethe risks of chronic cigarette smokers, there existsvirtually no scientific data nor substantial argumentwhich warrants the maintenance of marijuana as an illegalsubstance in the United States. In Weiss & Mirin’s book, Marijuana, the authorseffectively recount the history of marijuana-laws in thiscountry. Citing specifically how the drug was first arequired product whose growth was mandated on Americanfarms, she illustratively brings readers into thenineteenth and twentieth centuries where marijuana wasoriginally legal, widely-used and still well-looked upon.Apparently, the social degradation of marijuana began whenTexas police officers associated violent crimes andvarious other social delinquencies with the drug. Thiswas a spark that started a fire which by the 1920’s and30’s had grown so large it gave marijuana a reputationdefinitive of the colloquial term, “killer weed.” (Weiss& Mirin, 1986). Looking back over history, I find it virtuallyamazing that the controversy of marijuana’s legalizationhas not ended with its full endorsement. We continue tolive in a social hypocrisy; alcohol and tobacco are legalwhile an equivalent substance is not. From the alcoholprohibition which took place earlier this century, weshould have well-learned that such banning only createsmore problems. Similar to the results of sociallycatastrophic results of prohibition; marijuanadelegalization has led only to more pertinent crimes andto the existence of a large, illegal black market. Theonly difference in this case, is that after prohibition welearned; alcohol became legal again because it createdmore corruption when it was not so. Unfortunately, marijuana has not yet been legalizedpartially because it still carries with it such adamantnegative societal stereotypes which are reinforced by ablack market. If it were legalized, marijuana’s effectwould be no different than the legalization of alcohol andour society would be better off with regard to a plethoraof detailed ethical and economic aspects. Oddly enough, the United States Government hastheoretically accepted the use of marijuana for anextremely marginal group of users: AIDS patients. With thevarious examples of ill individuals cited in Bob Batz’srecent article, an argument is essentially made that thosewho are terminal, “have nothing to lose.” While this maynot exist as a sound, universal argument for thelegalization of marijuana, it does in my opinion,illustrate one of the many ridiculous social ironiessurrounding the situation: the government is willing totest and to experiment with a drug that we already knowall about and are allegedly so firmly against. (Batz,1994). Factually, there is no real case against marijuana’slegalization. In Elizabeth Neus’s article, Bill Grigg isquoted as saying that, “no studies indicated that smokedmarijuana had any benefit over approved medicinalpurposes.” But then again, no studies indicated that itharmed anyone either. True, it is argued that patientswith diseases such as AIDS risk pneumonia and otherdisease-upsetting symptoms when they smoke, but that is ifthey smoke any substance. They are still legally allowedto smoke cigarettes, so why should they not be allowed tosmoke marijuana; a substance which my articles report “hasa numbing effect on their condition.” (Batz, 1994). The media argues that “children who smoke marijuanaare far more likely than those who dont to try harderdrugs.” So ? In my opinion, that is all the more reasonto experiment more fully with the legalization ofmarijuana. After all, those studies were done in asociety were marijuana is illegal. Therefore, it existsin the same social category as much “harder”, moredangerous drugs such as cocaine. Legalizing the use ofmarijuana certainly will not worsen the situation. Ifanything at all, it will keep respectable users withintegrity from being forced to involve themselves in the”black market” and high-danger social scenes which theymust often frequent to obtain marijuana. With specificregard to young children, they would not be allowed(minimum age=21) to use marijuana any way so legalizationwould not necessarily have any negative nor any positiveeffect on other pertinent future decisions in their life. Many states have allowed doctors to prescribemarijuana for all sorts of pain relievers; including itsprescription as a positive aid for chemotherapy patientsto help them stop vomiting among other things.Ironically, even these uses have created greatcontroversy. (Arnold, 1991). But where is all of the controversy about legalizingmarijuana coming from ? Why is there any argument at all ?In one article which I researched, a poll revealed thatonly 38 out of 1282 people were against the legalizationof marijuana. I, evidently am not one of thosethirty-eight sheltered individuals. (Hunt, 1994). Ironically I, (and probably many other endorsers ofmarijuana legalization) have absolutely never evenexperimented with the drug in my life. I have no desireto use marijuana either. Rather, I maintain my desire touse common sense. The only arguments against marijuanaare the obvious health effects which are similar tosmoking and the irrelevant belief that it influences theuse of harder drugs. If we are so concerned over lung disease, we shouldban cigarettes as well. But of course, there is too muchmoney in the tobacco industry for that to ever happen.There is in fact, more pertinent data, demonstrating theill-effects of tobacco cigarettes than there of marijuana.(Neus, 1994). The latter is not even addictive ! Clearly,the time has come for our government to realize thesocioeconomic necessity of a marijuana industry; the drughelps terminal patients, harms no one any more (oftenless) than many other legal substances and currentlybrings more crime and trouble as an illegal substance in ablack market than it ever could if it were legally sold instores. Bibliography Anderson, Edward F. Peyote: The Divine Cactus. Arizona,1980. Arnold, David. Legal Medical Use of Marijuana Sought.Boston Globe. September 8, 1991; P. 35. Batz, Bob Jr., For AIDS Patients, Medicinal (Bot Legal)Marijuana. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; November 22, 1994. Hunt, Linda. Reader Feedback. Boston Globe. September15, 1994; P. 19. Hyde, Margaret O. and others. Mind Drugs. McGraw, 1981.Dodd, 5th ed., 1986. Lazear, Mindi. Marijuana and Contemporary America. FreePress, 1982. Neus, Elizabeth. Medicinal Pot Crowd now Looks toRepublicans. Gannett News Service. November 13, 1994. Weiss, Roger D. and Mirin, Steven M. Marijuana. AmericanPsychiatric Press, 1986.