Against Legalizing Marijuana in America

¶ … Against Legalizing Marijuana in America

Legalizing marijuana in the United States is not in the best interest of Americans. It would, first, be creating another "legal" drug, in addition to alcohol and nicotine. As has already been demonstrated, both alcohol and nicotine are legal drugs around which cottage industries have grown in delivering addiction therapy in order to help people overcome their abusive use of these drugs. It could be expected that if marijuana were legalized, that there would evolve an open and wide scale use and abuse of the drug both publicly and privately.

Arguments in Support of Legalizing Marijuana

The arguments in support of legalizing marijuana are, in some cases, good arguments. The notion that legalizing the drug will mean an end to the black market industry in smuggling the drug into the United States is a sound argument (the Washington Times, 2003, p. A19).

Much like the alcohol industry and prohibition, when you prevent access to a something the public wants, they will pursue ways in which to obtain it even if in so doing they are breaking the law. However, that does not justify ignoring the lessons learned from alcohol and tobacco. That is, the havoc those legal drugs bring into the lives of individuals and families in the worst case scenarios, and the amount of money devoted to curing those addictions. It is perhaps the human factor that outweighs the legal factors. Indeed, legalizing the drug would eliminate the black market trade of it, but it would not resolve the problems associated with the use of the drug. "Adding another drug to the same category as alcohol and tobacco would be a historical mistake," given public health policies aimed at fighting abuse of both substances, the U.N. International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) said in its annual report (the Washington Times, 2002, p. A12)."

Medicinal Marijuana

The controversy over the medicinal use of marijuana becomes a moot argument in light of the Supreme Court's 2002 ruling. "The Supreme Court said in May that it is illegal to distribute marijuana for medical purposes. But the ruling hasn't settled the issue in the United States (the Washington Times, 2002, p. A12)." That ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2005. "On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled against the "medical" marijuana proponents in Gonzales v. Raich, a case that endeavored to return the United States to 19th-century medicine by legalizing "medical" marijuana (the Washington Times, 2005, p. A21)." It would be impossible to determine if a person's prescription for raw marijuana was in fact the same marijuana purchased through a legal source. Additionally, the use of home grown or marijuana in its street form is unnecessary since science can recreate the ingredients that might, and it should be stressed here "might" be useful medically, and can put that ingredient in the form of a controlled prescription pill. Whether or not people, even physicians, think it has a medicinal use, the Supreme Court has ruled it not legal, and if society is to be governed by its laws and rules that is the final answer to the question. To do otherwise, is to break the law of the land.

Marijuana by Choice

The argument that if person chooses to smoke marijuana, like tobacco or alcohol, then that is the individual choice and the government has no business regulating a person's individual choices. (the Register Guard, 2005, p. A12)." However, the states individually continue to challenge the Supreme Court rulings by bringing new cases challenging the law to the Court. The notion that an individual has the right to harm oneself is an individual right, is not valid argument. Laws are made each day, and enforced, that are intended to keep people safe. No one person has a right to bring harm to his or her self, and, peripherally, in doing so, to pose a potential threat to the general population.

Using marijuana impairs the senses, not unlike alcohol, and to sanction another drug for public consumption that presents a potential self-control issue on an individual level, that poses a threat to others, is not acceptable. And just as people break the law to use marijuana, they will break the law of legalized marijuana that restricts the use of the drug to the home, or other place, by getting behind the wheel of a car, or making impaired choices that lead to the injury of others. Thus, it is not an individual choice issue.

Cost of Drug Use journal article by Roberto a. Trevino, Alan J. Richard (2002); in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, reveals that the cost of drug use and abuse, especially marijuana, is expensive to the country. "Marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug, used by 81% of current illicit drug users. Approximately 60% of current illicit drug users used only marijuana, 21% used marijuana and another illicit drug, and the remaining 19% used an illicit drug but not marijuana in the past month. Therefore, about 40% of current illicit drug users in 1998 (an estimated 5.4 million Americans) were current users of illicit drugs other than marijuana and hashish (p. 91)." Considering for a moment the cost associated with policing, rehabbing, educating and all other areas of anti-drug use proactive approaches; this translates into a huge cost to the taxpayer in attempting to help young people - and older people - see the opportunities beyond drug use.

Other Countries

The spread of legalized drug use in countries around the world is alarming; especially in places like Holland, where the impact of that legalized use is now becoming a common sight on the streets of the major cities in the country, and one which has been shown on numerous documentaries and news programs. In the UK, debates are taking that country closer and closer to the legalized use of marijuana (Lowry, 2001). Still, the United States resists jumping on the bandwagon due to pressure by a minority of the population. To this end, anti-drug advocates are criticized, but the efforts to keep marijuana illegal in the United States continue to be successful.

Still, research shows that the move to legalize marijuana is picking up both support and momentum (Nadelmann, 2004). Whether or not the anti-drug lobby in the United States will persevere cannot be predicted.

Conclusion

The arguments for legalizing marijuana in the United States is not as weighty as those arguments against it. Public opinion weighs heavy on the scales of justice and law making, therefore if the lobby to legalize marijuana is successful in converting people to their perspective, they might be successful in eventually reversing the law. The hope is that this will not occur, since it is more important than ever that there be as few distractions to a young person's education as possible. It is important, too, to decrease the potential for public harm at the hands of a person whose thinking is impaired by marijuana use. It is important to acknowledge that enough is not known about the use of marijuana, and there is no reason why exploring that scientifically or socially through publicly funded studies would be useful. Marijuana is not essential to the quality of individual life and the pursuit of happiness; and it should not be legalized.