Criminalisation, Legalization and the Mixed Blessing of

¶ … Criminalisation, legalization and the mixed blessing of medicalisation in the U.S.A." Reinarman discusses the issues related to the use of Marihuana. Marijuana or Marihuana has long been used to in America for recreational and medicinal purposes. As Manderson stated, "Debates on the reasons and rationalizations behind drug laws, their cost-effectiveness and their possible moral justification, have for a long time and will continue to rage" (Manderson, 1995, p. 800).

Even with the recent mainstream shift towards legalizing of marijuana use from California to Colorado, many still attach negative connotations to marijuana, maintaining the image of marijuana as a deviant and immoral behavior. Keeping this in mind, one must understand the origins of marijuana use in America to see why it was deemed a deviant and illegal activity. Marihuana was first introduced into America on a substantial scale during the 1910's by migrant Mexican workhands in the Southwest.

During this time, the use of marijuana caught on and from there it spread predominantly to numerous lower strata groups in locations in Louisiana like New Orleans in the 1920's. It wasn't until the 1930's that the image of marijuana use bgan to take a negative, deviant turn. Himmelstein writes: "Prior to the 1930's, among those few who considered the issue, there was no consistent nationwide image of marihuana use and the problems it caused" (Himmelstein, 1983, p. 22).

People didn't have issues with marijuana use during its initial spread and even saw it as something recreational more so than seedy or illegal. The Southwest, were marijuana use first became popularized, became the region were it became identified. "The very fact that the drug ultimately became known as "marihuana" in the 1930s suggest that the social image that became dominant then had roots in the Southwest" (Himmelstein, 1983, p. 22). Here is where the picture of a marihuana or marijuana user first developed and led eventually to the present day image.

In fact the visual evolution of the marihuana smoker has changed from recreational, to illegal, to medical, and back to recreational in the span of one hundred years. When it took a turn towards illegality, the image of marijuana became that of addiction or a path to addiction, as some would call it a "gateway drug." Manderson writes: "The most powerful image of modern drug use arouses immediate waves of discomfort and distaste so strong that we can hardly bear to dwell on it" (Manderson, 1995, p. 801).

Herein lies the issue of making the drug legal in the United States. The negative image of marijuana, which permeated into the U.S. through the 1960's and even up until the late 1990's remains today. "Not surprisingly, studies of drug consumption, which burgeoned during the 1960's tended to equate use (any type of use) with abuse and seldom took occasional or moderate use into account as a viable pattern (Zinberg, 1984, p. 3).

People who opposed marijuana use opposed it because they saw it as what most saw alcohol during prohibition, as a drug that led to dangerous addiction. Any drug use was deemed addictive behavior. "The use of any drug involves both values and rules of conduct and patterns of behavior; these two together are known as informal social controls" (Zinberg, 1984, p. 5). Informal social controls are how people constructed the negative image of marijuana and painted it as something that one could not control if consumed.

Symbolic politics as mentioned by Himmelstein, may help in dissecting society's perception of marijuana and perhaps offer a way to alter said perception. "As with the other two concepts, "symbolic politics" may prove useful in understanding drug ideology as well as drug controls" (Himmelstein, 1983, p. 18). Furthermore, looking into politics and policy, one of the main reasons the United States had and continues to have such a difficult time with legalization of marijuana is because of the personal interests and agendas of politicians.

Bulman-Pozen writes: State officials often further their interests and effectively oppose federal policy when they participate in the same statutory scheme as federal actors instead of operating in a separate, autonomous sphere. At the same time, state officials frequently rely on the autonomous lawmaking and executive powers of state governments to advance a decidedly national agenda, acting in cooperation with federal officials rather than independently of them (Bulman-Pozen, 2013, p. 1).

Politicians to some extent want to further their careers and their political power going either with or against the desires of the public and the government in order to gain popularity or favor. In reality if enough politicians viewed marijuana legalization as a benefit to their career, more and more people within the government would push for policy reform. Everything connects in the sense that society's image, along with the personal pursuits of politicians, and the actions of the government, all work together to either promote or criminalize something.

In reality marijuana is about or less deadly than cigarettes and alcohol. Hall and Lynskey explain: "Research on adolescent drug use over the past quarter century in the U.S.A. has consistently found that alcohol and tobacco are used before cannabis, which in turn, is used before hallucinogens and 'pills', and heroin and cocaine" (HALL & LYNSKEY, 2005, p. 39). Therefore the logic that "marijuana use" leads to addictive behavior becomes null in the sense that tobacco and alcohol use could do the same, yet are still legal.

In order for drug policy to.