green
The argument is divided into four parts:
I. Giving a brief description of marijuana, from a more objective, scientific standpoint.
II. The primary argument, from logic reasoning, for marijuana reform.
III. Addressing myths and false arguments for marijuana prohibition.
IV. A brief summary of the arguments for marijuana reform.
I. What is Cannabis?
1. CLASSIFICATION: Cannabis is a genus of plants, under scientific classification. It is of the family (classification one level about genus) of Cannabaceae. Cannabaceae is divided into the genus Cannabis and the genus Humulus. From the former genus, we get marijuana and other THC products, and interestingly enough, from the latter, we get hops for alcoholic beverages. Of the genus Cannabis, there is a single main species: Cannabis Sativa. There is some argument over whether or not all cannabis plants are Cannabis Sativa, or if they can be broken into separate species (Cannabis Indica, Cannabis Ruderalis, Cannabis Americana).
2. CANNABIS SATIVA: This particular species of plant is interesting, in that all of its parts can be used and refined for widely varying effects. The plant is harvested for hemp (the fibers of the plant), hemp seeds (the seeds of the plant stalk), buds and leaves (both used in marijuana), and resin (plant secretions used for hashish and hash oil). It is an extremely adaptive and bountiful plant. Cannabis Sativa can grow in almost all weather and climate conditions, and flourishes in soil with a pH rating of about 6.1 to 6.5. This range is often difficult for bacteria and harmful microorganisms to grow in.
A. HEMP: The stalk of the cannabis sativa plant, hemp, is an extremely hardy and versatile plant fiber. It is one of the oldest cultivated plants, thought to have been cultivated in China for 4500 years. It has been a major cornerstone of the agriculture economy until about 125 years ago, when it began serious competition with cotton. At the time, cotton was much easier to produce, after the invention of the cotton gin. Due to this, hemp production began to wane, even though it is a better material than cotton. It is 4 times softer, 4 times warmer, 3 times stronger, and 4 times as water absorbent. It can be refined to make clothing, rope, paper, and 3,000 other assorted industrial products. It has been estimated to be one of the most useful plants known to man.
B. HEMP SEEDS: The seeds from hemp are extremely rich in nutritional value. Unrefined, hemp provides many essential nutrients, amino acids, fatty acids, proteins, and oils that our bodies need daily. It is also extremely agreeable to the human digestive system. When refined, it can be used as an industrial lubricant. It can be used in paints, body products, soaps, hair products, and cleaning products. Further refined, it can be used as extremely abundant and renewable fuel source.
C. LEAVES/BUDS: The crushed mixture of flowering tops (buds) and leaves of cannabis sativa is known as marijuana, dozens of other slang terms. While all parts of the plant contain THC content, the greatest amount is found in the leaves and buds.
D. RESIN: The resin of the plant is compressed and refined into large bricks called “hashish”. Hashish can be converted into hash oil, and broken up for consumption.
3. PSYCHOACTIVE CONTENT: The active ingredient of cannabis sativa is THC (tetrahydrocannabinol). It is of a class of psychoactive compounds known as “cannabinoids”. The cannabinoid causes change in consciousness and active functions when it binds with a cannabinoid receptor in the brain. Due to the location of these receptors in the brains, cannabinoids are non-toxic, and do not affect vital bodily functions. In an average cannabis sativa plant, the THC content ranges between 0.5% and 28% pure. The actual amount can be manipulated through various hydroponics processes. Plants grown under 3% THC content are used only for the manufacturing of hemp. Most plants grown for recreational consumption are between 4% and 8% pure. Through advanced growing techniques, this amount can be increased to roughly 28%. These higher content breeds are fairly rare. THC is one of the only known active ingredients that cannot realistically be toxic to humans. The LD50 (average dosage it takes to kill 50% of the tested population) is so high that one would pass out from smoke inhalation before even nearing a fraction of the amount needed to cause death.
4. MARIJUANA: Marijuana is the extract of the cannabis sativa plant that is most commonly used for recreational consumption. It can be administered to the brain by smoking it, or ingesting it orally.
a) Smoking: A joint, or a wrapping paper filled and sealed with marijuana, is arguably the most common way to smoke marijuana. The joint can vary greatly in size and content. Pipes can be filled with marijuana, and then smoked. A bubbler is a pipe that has a small water chamber that cools the smoke before it reaches the lungs. Bongs are larger apparatuses that have a large water chamber and a long tube. Marijuana can also be used in a vaporizer, a device that slowly cooks the marijuana and releases THC vapors.
b) Oral Ingestion: Marijuana can be administered orally by mixing it into the butter used to make various food products. Popular foods are brownies, cakes, and pizza.
Marijuana causes several changes in the body, both mental and physical.
a) Psychological: Positive effects include euphoria, relaxation, increased ability for abstract or creative thought, pain relief, and strong suppression of nausea. Negative effects may include dizziness, paranoia, a short-term decrease in the efficiency of short-term memory functions, and clumsiness.
b) Physiological: Positive effects include muscle relaxation and heightened senses. Negative effects may include coughing, dry mouth, bloodshot eyes, and slightly increased heart rate.
Marijuana is most often sold in some form of plastic containment. Typical amounts sold for consumption are 1/8 ounce, ¼ ounce, ½ ounce, and one ounce. A 1/8 bag of medium to high quality marijuana varies greatly in price but may fetch $30-60. A full ounce sells for anywhere from $250-350. The amount commonly ingested to “get high” is extremely variable, dependent on both the THC content and amount of the specific marijuana used. One to two tenths of a gram (3.5 grams = one eighth ounce) of 4%-8% THC content marijuana is enough to get an average person sufficiently high. Marijuana that is ingested orally has a somewhat different effect, emphasizing a positive physical change more than a positive intellectual change. The average length of a high can range from 30-190 minutes. If ingested orally, this length is significantly longer, by several hours.
4. HASHISH: Hashish is comparable to marijuana. It is often of a higher general THC content, but is otherwise very much the same. The effects of hashish are often reported to be stronger than those of marijuana, but this is dependant upon type and amount of hashish used. Hashish may be smoked by being smoked alone, broken up into mixtures of tobacco and marijuana, or ingested orally by being baked into butter.
5. LEGAL STATUS: Cannabis is a Schedule I Drug under US drug law. Schedule I means that the drug “has high potential for abuse, and has no currently accepted medical use”. For comparison, Schedule V is the opposite end of the spectrum, and has “the lowest potential for abuse, and currently accepted medical use”. These would include some prescription drugs. This ruling is highly disputable. Drugs under Schedule I include all hallucinogens and heroin. Drugs under Schedule II include painkillers such as morphine, and stimulants such as cocaine. This is to actually suggest that marijuana is more dangerous than cocaine, and has no medical value, which is absolutely and objectively untrue.
II. Primary Reasoning For Full Cannabis Legalization
The following is reasoning, by ethical logic, for the full reform of marijuana and hemp laws. Much of the following can also be interpreted as the basis of all ethical law, particularly the first and main point. This stands alone as pure reason, and does not take into account statistics or variable numbers.
I. Pure Ethical Reasoning
A. It is unethical to infringe upon one person’s right to pursue any activity, so long as that activity does not infringe upon the rights of another person, in a way that cannot reasonably be avoided.
1. A ruling body of any kind should not be able to monitor and regulate what one person does only to him/herself.
a) Giving authority power to eliminate individual freedoms creates climates of ‘ultimate authority’ that would allow any governing body, at any time, to make anything illegal. “Wrong” and “bad” are usually subjective terms, and it is wrong, by pure reason, to allow a small subjective body to force itself on a large objective body. EX: If the current government was strictly Catholic, religious doctrine may persuade them into deeming other religions to be ‘immoral’ and ‘wrong’, and ban them. Doing so is wrong because religious conviction is an isolated individual choice.
b) Anything COULD be reasoned to be a cause for harm to an individual. Eating CAN lead to obesity. Driving CAN lead to accidents. Watching TV CAN lead to physical and mental decay. Every object used in day-to-day life CAN be used incorrectly, in some way, causing harm or death to the individual. It is the government’s responsibility to eliminate the production of anything that DOES lead to UNAVOIDABLE consequences, not to eliminate the use of things that CAN lead to AVOIDABLE consequences.
2. A ruling body should be permitted to monitor and regulate one person’s activity if it violates another person’s rights, IN SOME CASES.
a) At the most simplistic level, the problem with this is that all crimes are an infringement of rights. In a situation involving two or more willing, able, and consenting individuals, there can be no crime. If negative consequences arise out of the situation, there still is no crime, because both parties entered into a closed system of agreement and acceptance. The highest of all crimes, murder, is STILL simply an issue of the infringement of rights, namely the right to live.
b) The rights of one person MAY STILL BE ETHICALLY VIOLATED, under certain conditions. If there arises a situation in which a person’s rights are violated, and that individual can easily and effortlessly abandon the situation, there is no infraction of rights. In cases of serious crime, the victim cannot remove themselves from the situation without some effort. Assault is justifiably a crime because it is a force of one person’s will upon another. They cannot “choose” to leave the situation without a fight, or some kind of loss. Theft is a crime because it is a force of will. However, many “violations of right” can be crime-less. EX: A person enters an art gallery, where nudity is shown. This person feels his rights are violated. However, he can easily choose not to look at this art, or leave. This is far easier than the alternative which is the removal of the art piece, as this is costly, wastes time, and “violates the rights” of the individuals who would have wanted to see the pictures.
c) If one individual violates the rights of another in an effortlessly avoidable way, a governmental body DOES have the right to pass law against an infraction that NECESSARILY leads to the incident. EX: A person crashes their car into another car, after driving over a blind hill too quickly. Numerous variables led to this incident, but only one variable NECESSARILY lead to this incident. Cars should not be banned because they CAN BE and USUALLY ARE operated without crashing. The blind hill very much contributed to the incident, but “driving over hills” should not be banned, because they CAN BE and USUALLY ARE navigated without unpleasant consequences. The singular thing that led to this event was IRRESPONSIBLE DRIVING. Driving irresponsibly CAN be regulated by law, because it DOES NECESSARILY lead to negative consequences.
B. Marijuana use does not NECESSARILY, in any way, infringe upon the rights of another human being, in a way that an individual cannot effortlessly avoid.
1. Secondhand smoke causes health problems in others: This is irrevocably true. However, should cigarettes be banned? Hardly any one would argue this. Smoking a cigarette or cigar DOES NOT NECESSARILY lead to secondhand smoke. It only leads to this when the object is smoked in a public place. Cigarettes and cigars can just as easily be smoked in the privacy of one’s home. If company is present at home, a guest CAN EFFORTLESSLY choose to abandon the situation if they do not desire secondhand smoke. The NECESSARY cause of secondhand smoke is smoking in public, and this, if anything, may be subject to governmental intervention.
a) Counterargument: Smoking in the confines of one’s home when there is a child or baby present is unfair to their rights, as they cannot make a willful choice to leave the situation. Although this is true, marijuana is smoked much more infrequently than tobacco, and is not smoked enough to create a problem with secondhand smoke in the house. Also, marijuana use can easily be designated to one room, or one place in the house, greatly lowering contact with children. Furthermore, making marijuana illegal in NO WAY decreases the incentive for an individual to smoke in their house. If anything, it increases it, by forcing users to smoke in a private place where they cannot be seen.
2. The use of marijuana impairs the operation of automobiles: This is only somewhat true. As opposed to alcohol, which causes a total breakdown of logical thought, and severe impairment of the senses, as well as reaction time, marijuana users are aware of their limitations under the influence. Some studies have shown that drivers under the influence of marijuana make up for their impairment by driving slower and more defensively. Even if it was as bad as alcohol, marijuana CAN be used without NECESSARILY causing the user to operate an automobile. The NECESSARY event that should be made (and is) illegal is “driving under the influence”. An individual under the influence of marijuana still makes a solemn decision to place himself in that situation, and must face the consequences. A counterargument may be that marijuana robs the user of the free will to make the decision. This is false, because even when greatly intoxicated on marijuana, the user still has absolute and complete free will, as opposed to harder drugs. If one is still worried about the legalization of marijuana causing more people to drive intoxicated, then we may examine the option of increasing the punishment for this crime. This would do more good than outright banning the drug, as it reinforces incentive to NOT DRIVE INTOXICATED, whereas the banning of marijuana itself provides no extra incentive to not commit the actual crime.
3. The use of marijuana causes domestic abuse: This is nonsense. Marijuana simply does not cause violent behavior. Most violent behavior from drug use is caused by the legal drug alcohol.
4. The use of marijuana causes the ruin of loved ones: As most users of marijuana are only part-time and recreational, this is ridiculous. Even daily users rarely change their personality enough to significantly affect others. Even so, the government should not be involved here at all. Although it may hurt family and friends, the user has made his decision to take the drug. If they truly love him enough, they should intervene when they see that he is abusing the drug. If he still continues abusing marijuana, they can effortlessly abandon the situation.
C. Therefore, all cannabis products should be legalized. (Syllogism; A + B = C)
III. Myths and False Arguments for Marijuana Prohibition
In this section, the various arguments for marijuana prohibition will be addressed, and thoroughly debunked. Points next a roman numeral are general points that would be offered by a marijuana prohibitionist. Points next to capital letters are specific issues relating to the general subject. Any other points made are there to debunk the argument, unless otherwise stated.
A prohibitionist could only argue that marijuana should be illegal for the following reasons. Any other form of reasoning would directly contradict the consistent reasoning of our lawmaking, both theoretical, and in application.
I. Marijuana should be illegal because it a health threat.
A. Anything that negatively affects health should be illegal.
1. This is ethically wrong. Just because something can cause harm to an individual does not mean it is subject to government regulation. The government does not exist to prevent us from hurting ourselves, it exists to prevent us from forcing hurt upon each other, or to prevent the sale of chemical compounds that can be used to harm people on a massive scale.
2. If this were true, why are cigarettes and alcohol illegal? They are inarguably more dangerous to individual health than all illegal drugs combined. Furthermore, almost any product can be used in excess to cause extremely negative health effects. Obesity is far more dangerous than smoking marijuana. Should the government regulate how much we eat? Tanning beds greatly increase the chance of skin cancer. Should tanning be illegal? If this point held any weight at all, the government would have to regulate all of these things to be internally consistent. Where does one draw the line?
B. Marijuana is very addictive.
1. No, its not. There is no component in THC that is physically addicting. Furthermore, it is one of the least psychologically addicting drugs. It has been shown in scientific study that it is less addicting than nicotine, less addicting than alcohol, and even less addicting than caffeine.
C. Marijuana increase tolerance, causing the user to smoke more each time.
1. No, it doesn’t. Again, it has been scientifically proven that tolerance in marijuana in only increased by a fraction of a percent over time. Again, it increases tolerance less than nicotine, less than alcohol, and less than caffeine.
D. Marijuana withdrawal is difficult, causing health problems for the user.
1. No, it’s not. Marijuana has the lowest amount of withdrawal effects of any drug. A heavy user may experience anxiety or boredom after stopping use, but usually only for a few days. Once again, its withdrawal rate is lower than nicotine, alcohol, and caffeine.
E. Marijuana kills brain cells.
1. No, it doesn’t. Not even in heavy, long-term use. Recent scientific studies have found absolutely no evidence of brain cell deterioration over time. The basis for this myth is in an earlier study, controlled by the government, that involved suffocated rhesus monkeys with marijuana smoke for hours at a time. The resulting brain damage did not come from marijuana smoke, but lack of oxygen getting to the brain. The study has since been dismissed by the scientific community at large.
F. Marijuana causes problems with short and long-term memory loss.
1. Marijuana simply does not cause long term memory loss at all, period.
2. Marijuana causes short-term memory functions to be less efficient, WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE DRUG. When not under the influence of the drug, there are no changes to short-term memory function. In the case of heavier uses, they may experience some loss in function, but it is only because they are consistently under the influence, and their functionality would return upon the discontinuation of use.
G. Marijuana can cause mental illness.
1. There is no case study that has ever successfully provided a direct correlation between marijuana use and mental illness.
2. If anything, marijuana may rarely cause the awakening of mental illnesses that already existed within the individual. This is true of all drugs, but is almost nonexistent in the case of marijuana, as it is simply not that psychologically powerful.
H. Marijuana causes problems with hormone development.
1. This may or may not be true. Some studies have verified disturbances in sperm count or in growth hormones, while other studies have not found any such thing. The data on this is currently inconclusive.
I. Marijuana causes a lack of motivation.
1. No study has ever conclusively found any link between smoking marijuana and amotivational syndrome, even in heavy users. Some statistical studies have shown marijuana users on average hold higher-paying jobs than non-users. This is not to suggest that marijuana causes increased intelligence or productivity; it simply suggests that the above assertion is completely meaningless.
2. An assertion like this is a victim of the logical fallacy “correlation implies cause”. One cannot readily discern between marijuana causing laziness in people, or unmotivated people having a greater tendency to smoke marijuana than motivated people. Either one could account for a correlation, so this statement is invalid.
J. Smoking marijuana can increase the chances of throat/lung cancer.
1. This is true. However, it is not the act of ingesting marijuana that causes cancer, it is the act of smoking alone. Even so, tobacco users are at a much higher risk than marijuana users. Marijuana users smoke far less than tobacco users to get the same desired effect. The 400 chemicals in marijuana are benign, compared to the 1000+ chemicals in cigarettes, which range from benign to extremely harmful.
2. Marijuana can be orally ingested, eliminating the increased chance of cancer completely.
3. Marijuana can be vaporized, almost completely eliminating the increased chance of cancer.
K. Smoking marijuana while pregnant damages the fetus.
1. Evidence on this is currently inconclusive. Some studies say that it does, others have found marijuana has no effect on the fetus.
2. Even if this were true, one could simply choose to not smoke marijuana while pregnant. The end.
L. Smoking marijuana negatively affects one’s appearance.
1. What? Since when does the government regulate things based on how it makes people look?
2. The idea that marijuana causes long-term changes to one’s appearance is ridiculous. Marijuana CAN cause unwanted changes in appearance while under the influence of the drug, but they vanish when no longer under the influence.
M. The number one drug people are admitted to drug rehabilitation programs for is Marijuana.
1. This is technically true, but one also has to consider that a considerably larger number of Americans use marijuana, more than any other drug is used. The only way this statistic could be relevant is if one determined the percentage of admission for each drug, by dividing the number of users by the number of users admitted to rehabilitation.
2. This does not even indicate that marijuana is actually a health problem. More people are arrested for marijuana than any other drug. Often, an alternative to avoiding greater punishment is going to drug rehabilitation classes. This does not indicate that more people are concerned about their use, only that more people want to avoid jail time and fines.
N. Marijuana use negatively affects the immune system.
1. This is unconfirmed. Some studies that have shown this have since been disproved. Also, some studies have shown that marijuana may strengthen the immune system, in some cases.
O. Marijuana has become more potent over the years.
1. This is true. THC levels in the average marijuana sample have risen from 0.5% to 4.5% in the last thirty years. However, this is only a good thing for health. The only negative health effect of marijuana is caused by smoking, and if the drug is stronger, one needs to smoke less to get the same effect.
II. Marijuana should be illegal because it is a criminal threat.
A. Marijuana causes violence.
1. No, it doesn’t. The psychoactive effects of marijuana are the exact opposite of those that would cause violence. Alcohol often causes extremely violent outbursts. Again, if this is a valid reason, why is alcohol legal?
B. Being under the influence of marijuana causes car accidents.
1. It is true that driving under the influence of ANY psychoactive substance causes impairment, which MAY lead to accidents. However, in the vast majority of cases where marijuana was involved in car accidents, alcohol was also involved.
2. Driving while drunk and driving while high are COMPLETELY different. When one is drunk, coordination is significantly impaired, the feeling of restraint is significantly impaired, and the ability to make decisions is significantly impaired. When one is high, coordination is slightly impaired, the feeling of restraint is slightly impaired, and the ability to make decisions is unchanged. Therefore, a user of marijuana has the ability to make a decision not to drive, and if he does, drive with heightened caution, and lessened speed.
3. One can simply choose NOT to drive. It’s that simple. If marijuana were legalized, there is nothing to suggest that more people would choose to drive intoxicated, nor is there anything to suggest that more people would smoke marijuana, period. If one is genuinely concerned about cutting down on DUIs, then they would be much better off creating harsher sentences for those that do, and creative incentive, rather than banning a product.
4. Current drug laws allow policemen to charge someone with a DUI if ANY AMOUNT OF THC IS FOUND IN THEIR SYSTEM, AT ALL. THC can stay in one’s system for up to five weeks after being ingested. During this time, only the first few hours affect the individual in any noticeable way. This law is unethical, and exists because the government can, because of marijuana’s current illegal state.
C. Marijuana causes gang violence.
1. No, it doesn’t. The sale of soft drugs, such as marijuana, usually do not involve larger organizations, but rather independent dealers.
2. Gang violence IS caused by the sale of hard drugs, but this is because keeping them illegal causes a black market. If these drugs were legal, there would be no black market violence.
III. Marijuana should be illegal because it is an economic threat.
A. Marijuana would hurt the US economy if it were legal.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Marijuana could be regulated like other legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco. Therefore, it would be taxed accordingly, and all the untaxed money currently being spent on marijuana would be partially going back to our government.
2. If marijuana were legal, it would reason that all forms of hemp production would be legal. The widespread, large scale production of hemp would create billions upon billions of dollars in revenue for our country, and would save billions and billions of dollars on more costly, more inefficient, and more controlled products.
3. We pour billions of dollars into the arrest, detainment, and prosecution of marijuana users each year. If marijuana were legalized, this percentage of our annual budget would be completely freed.
B. Marijuana legalization would cause a rise in health-care costs.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Any increase in health care costs caused by legalization would be covered by a fraction of the increase in government revenue.
2. If marijuana were legalized, users would not be arrested, and therefore wouldn’t be persuaded into admitting themselves into rehabilitation that they didn’t need in the first place.
C. Marijuana legalization would cause a loss in job productivity.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Again, there has never been any correlation between marijuana use and amotivational syndrome. Try telling this to the millions of hard-working marijuana users who take great pride in their work.
2. Only on-the-job use of marijuana would cause this to happen. If this does happen, it would be immediately noticeable, and the employer could then simply choose to fire the inadequate worker. This is the same thing done with alcohol abusers. What is the difference?
D. Marijuana is a costly habit.
1. Why should the government have any input? So is collecting models. So is buying cigarettes and alcohol. So is any habit.
2. If one honestly cared about this, then they would want to legalize marijuana. Marijuana is only fairly expensive because it is part of an unregulated black market. If marijuana were legalized, it would sell for a fraction of the current price.
E. The sale of marijuana funds terrorist organizations.
1. Doubtful. Any money that would come from drugs, and go to terrorist organizations, comes from harder drugs. There is a highly profitable heroin and cocaine black market that gives money to terrorists, but not marijuana.
2. Even if this were true, that’s because IT’S CURRENTLY ILLEGAL. If marijuana were legal, the money would be going to businesses, and our government, instead.
3. A major market that does pump money into the hands of terrorists is the oil market. Saudis who make billions off of oil regularly give percentages of their money to terrorist organizations. If marijuana were legal, hempseed oil would be legal too. Hempseed oil is just as efficient at fueling automobiles, and would nearly eliminate our dependency on the people who REGULARLY fund terrorists.
IV. Marijuana should be illegal because it is immoral.
A. Something that is immoral should be illegal.
1. No, absolutely not. Morality is extremely subjective, and cannot possibly be designated by a large governmental infrastructure. 2,500 years of philosophical debate has not really turned up any certainties in the case of morality, so why should a group of politically motivated bureaucrats even begin to think they could deal out the ‘right’ morality? The best a government can do for its people is protect its people from harmful actions against one another. Thanks to our (mostly) wonderful constitution, the US government can only get involved in our actions, not our thoughts, and certainly not abstract moral ideas.
2. Law does not equal morality. It is a very weak individual who lives his life by law alone. Law is just the current set of rules that a government, at that specific time, feels is best for keeping the peace and strengthening the country. It has little to do with pure ethics, and nothing to do with morals.
B. Marijuana is religiously immoral.
1. The only religions that specifically outlaw the use of any type of drug are Islam (some forms outlaw alcohol) and Mormonism (outlaws all types of drug use). Most other religions are vague or indifferent to this issue of drug use. Some passages in the Christian Bible seem to be against the use of drugs, while other passages seem to actually promote the healthful use of drugs. Many religions even hold drug use as their cornerstone, dating back to the oldest form of religion. Rastafarianism SPECIFICALLY recommends marijuana use to seek a spiritual path.
2. Even if this were true, so what? Church and state are separated for a reason; everyone has different religious beliefs, and if the government started running itself based on any religious ideal, it would undoubtedly cause the suffering of millions.
C. Drug use is immoral.
1. Based on what? This statement is often used and almost never backed with any explanation.
2. What is considered drug use? Just hard drugs? Just illegal drugs? Are alcohol and tobacco immoral? Is caffeine immoral? Is sugar immoral? The word “drug” is way too vague to convey any kind of meaningful opinion. Where does one draw the line?
D. The legalization of marijuana sends a negative message to our kids.
1. What message is that?
2. Just because something is legal does not mean that it is culturally OK to imbibe in. Gambling is legal, but that doesn’t mean everyone considers it moral. Having sex before marriage is legal, but society generally frowns upon it. If marijuana were legal, it would mean marijuana was legal. That’s it. It’s not a government endorsement.
3. No, a negative message to send to kids is “don’t do that, because I said so, because its illegal, and its completely wrong if you even do it once”. If you tell your kids not to do something without giving them logical reasons, it only makes them withdraw from you, and trust your opinion less. If you tell them not to do something because its illegal, it teaches them that morality should come from the law, which it shouldn’t. A zero tolerance attitude towards drugs is as effective of a teaching as is a zero tolerance attitude towards sex. Teaching kids to abstain from sex doesn’t help, it just leaves them uneducated when they eventually have sex anyway. The positive message to send to kids is educating them on the facts, teaching that careful experimentation and moderation is not morally wrong, and allowing them to make their own decisions as human beings, not as slaves afraid of punishment.
V. Miscellaneous Arguments
A. Marijuana is a gateway drug that leads to harder drugs.
1. There is absolutely no correlation between marijuana and hard drugs when looking at their effects. Marijuana belongs to a group of drugs called “hallucinogens”, where as cocaine is a “stimulant” and heroin is a “barbiturate”. It is assumed that one takes the drug based on its desired effect. A marijuana or LSD user would expect hallucination. A user of cocaine expects to be stimulated. A user of heroin expects to be calmed. Pot smokers may not have any interest whatsoever in speeding up or slowing down, only hallucinating.
2. This theory is based upon an incredibly old logical fallacy, “correlation implies cause”. It may be observed that marijuana users will move onto hard drugs, but this in absolutely no way implies that marijuana CAUSES this. Marijuana is the most common, cheapest, well known, weakest intoxicant. Of course, if someone is naturally inclined to use drugs, they will start with marijuana. Saying that marijuana leads to harder drugs is as irrefutably ridiculous as saying “learning addition leads to majoring in calculus” or “reading about bombs leads to one becoming a terrorist”. In all of these cases, it is simply LOGICAL that one PREDISPOSED to an interest would start with the SIMPLEST element in the field.
3. The majority of scientific studies have already completely disproved the gateway theory as having no merit whatsoever. Some studies have even concluded that the use of marijuana discourages one from moving onto harder drugs, by distracting them with a cheap and effective substance that does not increase tolerance, cause addiction, or cause withdrawal symptoms.
B. Our marijuana prohibition is currently working.
1. No, its not. Since the Nixon Administration, the percentage of teenagers who have used marijuana has not gone down, it has slightly risen. The same goes for teenagers who regularly use marijuana. Our policies are not working.
2. Any policy that justifies pouring billions of dollars each year into a battle that is never won, or even dented, is a failed policy.
3. Any policy that imprisons non-violent, harmless citizens, and labels them “felons” is a failed policy.
4. Any policy that unnecessarily creates a multi-billion dollar black market is a failed policy.
C. If marijuana were legalized, the number of users would dramatically increase.
1. No, it wouldn’t. In a comprehensive study of drug-use in schools, the question was asked, “how would your drug habits change if marijuana was legalized?” Of those polled, 59% felt that they would still have nothing to do with it regardless of legal status. 17% said their current drug habits would not change at all. Only 7.1% said they would increase their use, and 8.4% said they would consider trying it.
2. In Amsterdam, where marijuana is legal to purchase and use, the amount of users in their country has not risen since legalization. There was a slight peak in use immediately after the law went into effect, and then its been normal since. Also, they have half the number of teenager users, as compared to the US.
IV. A Brief Summary of Arguments for Marijuana Reform
1. It is unethical to make illegal something that does not necessarily cause one person to harm another, in a way that person can reasonably avoid.
2. There are no massive health problems associated with marijuana.
3. We are wasting billions of dollars each year on a failed policy.
4. We could be gaining billions of dollars each year on taxable revenue.
5. We could be gaining billions of dollars each year from the growth of hemp, which can create thousands of useful products.
6. Hemp could produce paper, which would eliminate the need to cut down trees.
7. Hemp could produce fuel, which would eliminate our dependency on crude oil.
8. Marijuana is a naturally therapeutic substance that could enrich the lives of millions now suffering from health problems.
9. Hempseed could enrich the diet of millions of people.
10. There are no crime problems directly associated with marijuana use.
11. Marijuana and hemp are currently illegal because of big business lobbyists and massive racist propaganda campaigns. The decorticator, the hemp version of the cotton gin, was finally developed, eliminating cotton’s production advantage. Shortly thereafter, the cotton companies, specifically DuPont, lobbied the US government to make illegal marijuana, inventing all sorts of ridiculous and untruthful propaganda. The term ‘marijuana’ was new at this point to the US vernacular, and the bill banning marijuana passed without hesitation. It was only after the passing of the bill that the congressmen found out hemp and marijuana came from the same plant.
12. If every single one of these arguments fails, WHY ARE CIGARETTES AND ALCOHOL LEGAL?
I. Giving a brief description of marijuana, from a more objective, scientific standpoint.
II. The primary argument, from logic reasoning, for marijuana reform.
III. Addressing myths and false arguments for marijuana prohibition.
IV. A brief summary of the arguments for marijuana reform.
I. What is Cannabis?
1. CLASSIFICATION: Cannabis is a genus of plants, under scientific classification. It is of the family (classification one level about genus) of Cannabaceae. Cannabaceae is divided into the genus Cannabis and the genus Humulus. From the former genus, we get marijuana and other THC products, and interestingly enough, from the latter, we get hops for alcoholic beverages. Of the genus Cannabis, there is a single main species: Cannabis Sativa. There is some argument over whether or not all cannabis plants are Cannabis Sativa, or if they can be broken into separate species (Cannabis Indica, Cannabis Ruderalis, Cannabis Americana).
2. CANNABIS SATIVA: This particular species of plant is interesting, in that all of its parts can be used and refined for widely varying effects. The plant is harvested for hemp (the fibers of the plant), hemp seeds (the seeds of the plant stalk), buds and leaves (both used in marijuana), and resin (plant secretions used for hashish and hash oil). It is an extremely adaptive and bountiful plant. Cannabis Sativa can grow in almost all weather and climate conditions, and flourishes in soil with a pH rating of about 6.1 to 6.5. This range is often difficult for bacteria and harmful microorganisms to grow in.
A. HEMP: The stalk of the cannabis sativa plant, hemp, is an extremely hardy and versatile plant fiber. It is one of the oldest cultivated plants, thought to have been cultivated in China for 4500 years. It has been a major cornerstone of the agriculture economy until about 125 years ago, when it began serious competition with cotton. At the time, cotton was much easier to produce, after the invention of the cotton gin. Due to this, hemp production began to wane, even though it is a better material than cotton. It is 4 times softer, 4 times warmer, 3 times stronger, and 4 times as water absorbent. It can be refined to make clothing, rope, paper, and 3,000 other assorted industrial products. It has been estimated to be one of the most useful plants known to man.
B. HEMP SEEDS: The seeds from hemp are extremely rich in nutritional value. Unrefined, hemp provides many essential nutrients, amino acids, fatty acids, proteins, and oils that our bodies need daily. It is also extremely agreeable to the human digestive system. When refined, it can be used as an industrial lubricant. It can be used in paints, body products, soaps, hair products, and cleaning products. Further refined, it can be used as extremely abundant and renewable fuel source.
C. LEAVES/BUDS: The crushed mixture of flowering tops (buds) and leaves of cannabis sativa is known as marijuana, dozens of other slang terms. While all parts of the plant contain THC content, the greatest amount is found in the leaves and buds.
D. RESIN: The resin of the plant is compressed and refined into large bricks called “hashish”. Hashish can be converted into hash oil, and broken up for consumption.
3. PSYCHOACTIVE CONTENT: The active ingredient of cannabis sativa is THC (tetrahydrocannabinol). It is of a class of psychoactive compounds known as “cannabinoids”. The cannabinoid causes change in consciousness and active functions when it binds with a cannabinoid receptor in the brain. Due to the location of these receptors in the brains, cannabinoids are non-toxic, and do not affect vital bodily functions. In an average cannabis sativa plant, the THC content ranges between 0.5% and 28% pure. The actual amount can be manipulated through various hydroponics processes. Plants grown under 3% THC content are used only for the manufacturing of hemp. Most plants grown for recreational consumption are between 4% and 8% pure. Through advanced growing techniques, this amount can be increased to roughly 28%. These higher content breeds are fairly rare. THC is one of the only known active ingredients that cannot realistically be toxic to humans. The LD50 (average dosage it takes to kill 50% of the tested population) is so high that one would pass out from smoke inhalation before even nearing a fraction of the amount needed to cause death.
4. MARIJUANA: Marijuana is the extract of the cannabis sativa plant that is most commonly used for recreational consumption. It can be administered to the brain by smoking it, or ingesting it orally.
a) Smoking: A joint, or a wrapping paper filled and sealed with marijuana, is arguably the most common way to smoke marijuana. The joint can vary greatly in size and content. Pipes can be filled with marijuana, and then smoked. A bubbler is a pipe that has a small water chamber that cools the smoke before it reaches the lungs. Bongs are larger apparatuses that have a large water chamber and a long tube. Marijuana can also be used in a vaporizer, a device that slowly cooks the marijuana and releases THC vapors.
b) Oral Ingestion: Marijuana can be administered orally by mixing it into the butter used to make various food products. Popular foods are brownies, cakes, and pizza.
Marijuana causes several changes in the body, both mental and physical.
a) Psychological: Positive effects include euphoria, relaxation, increased ability for abstract or creative thought, pain relief, and strong suppression of nausea. Negative effects may include dizziness, paranoia, a short-term decrease in the efficiency of short-term memory functions, and clumsiness.
b) Physiological: Positive effects include muscle relaxation and heightened senses. Negative effects may include coughing, dry mouth, bloodshot eyes, and slightly increased heart rate.
Marijuana is most often sold in some form of plastic containment. Typical amounts sold for consumption are 1/8 ounce, ¼ ounce, ½ ounce, and one ounce. A 1/8 bag of medium to high quality marijuana varies greatly in price but may fetch $30-60. A full ounce sells for anywhere from $250-350. The amount commonly ingested to “get high” is extremely variable, dependent on both the THC content and amount of the specific marijuana used. One to two tenths of a gram (3.5 grams = one eighth ounce) of 4%-8% THC content marijuana is enough to get an average person sufficiently high. Marijuana that is ingested orally has a somewhat different effect, emphasizing a positive physical change more than a positive intellectual change. The average length of a high can range from 30-190 minutes. If ingested orally, this length is significantly longer, by several hours.
4. HASHISH: Hashish is comparable to marijuana. It is often of a higher general THC content, but is otherwise very much the same. The effects of hashish are often reported to be stronger than those of marijuana, but this is dependant upon type and amount of hashish used. Hashish may be smoked by being smoked alone, broken up into mixtures of tobacco and marijuana, or ingested orally by being baked into butter.
5. LEGAL STATUS: Cannabis is a Schedule I Drug under US drug law. Schedule I means that the drug “has high potential for abuse, and has no currently accepted medical use”. For comparison, Schedule V is the opposite end of the spectrum, and has “the lowest potential for abuse, and currently accepted medical use”. These would include some prescription drugs. This ruling is highly disputable. Drugs under Schedule I include all hallucinogens and heroin. Drugs under Schedule II include painkillers such as morphine, and stimulants such as cocaine. This is to actually suggest that marijuana is more dangerous than cocaine, and has no medical value, which is absolutely and objectively untrue.
II. Primary Reasoning For Full Cannabis Legalization
The following is reasoning, by ethical logic, for the full reform of marijuana and hemp laws. Much of the following can also be interpreted as the basis of all ethical law, particularly the first and main point. This stands alone as pure reason, and does not take into account statistics or variable numbers.
I. Pure Ethical Reasoning
A. It is unethical to infringe upon one person’s right to pursue any activity, so long as that activity does not infringe upon the rights of another person, in a way that cannot reasonably be avoided.
1. A ruling body of any kind should not be able to monitor and regulate what one person does only to him/herself.
a) Giving authority power to eliminate individual freedoms creates climates of ‘ultimate authority’ that would allow any governing body, at any time, to make anything illegal. “Wrong” and “bad” are usually subjective terms, and it is wrong, by pure reason, to allow a small subjective body to force itself on a large objective body. EX: If the current government was strictly Catholic, religious doctrine may persuade them into deeming other religions to be ‘immoral’ and ‘wrong’, and ban them. Doing so is wrong because religious conviction is an isolated individual choice.
b) Anything COULD be reasoned to be a cause for harm to an individual. Eating CAN lead to obesity. Driving CAN lead to accidents. Watching TV CAN lead to physical and mental decay. Every object used in day-to-day life CAN be used incorrectly, in some way, causing harm or death to the individual. It is the government’s responsibility to eliminate the production of anything that DOES lead to UNAVOIDABLE consequences, not to eliminate the use of things that CAN lead to AVOIDABLE consequences.
2. A ruling body should be permitted to monitor and regulate one person’s activity if it violates another person’s rights, IN SOME CASES.
a) At the most simplistic level, the problem with this is that all crimes are an infringement of rights. In a situation involving two or more willing, able, and consenting individuals, there can be no crime. If negative consequences arise out of the situation, there still is no crime, because both parties entered into a closed system of agreement and acceptance. The highest of all crimes, murder, is STILL simply an issue of the infringement of rights, namely the right to live.
b) The rights of one person MAY STILL BE ETHICALLY VIOLATED, under certain conditions. If there arises a situation in which a person’s rights are violated, and that individual can easily and effortlessly abandon the situation, there is no infraction of rights. In cases of serious crime, the victim cannot remove themselves from the situation without some effort. Assault is justifiably a crime because it is a force of one person’s will upon another. They cannot “choose” to leave the situation without a fight, or some kind of loss. Theft is a crime because it is a force of will. However, many “violations of right” can be crime-less. EX: A person enters an art gallery, where nudity is shown. This person feels his rights are violated. However, he can easily choose not to look at this art, or leave. This is far easier than the alternative which is the removal of the art piece, as this is costly, wastes time, and “violates the rights” of the individuals who would have wanted to see the pictures.
c) If one individual violates the rights of another in an effortlessly avoidable way, a governmental body DOES have the right to pass law against an infraction that NECESSARILY leads to the incident. EX: A person crashes their car into another car, after driving over a blind hill too quickly. Numerous variables led to this incident, but only one variable NECESSARILY lead to this incident. Cars should not be banned because they CAN BE and USUALLY ARE operated without crashing. The blind hill very much contributed to the incident, but “driving over hills” should not be banned, because they CAN BE and USUALLY ARE navigated without unpleasant consequences. The singular thing that led to this event was IRRESPONSIBLE DRIVING. Driving irresponsibly CAN be regulated by law, because it DOES NECESSARILY lead to negative consequences.
B. Marijuana use does not NECESSARILY, in any way, infringe upon the rights of another human being, in a way that an individual cannot effortlessly avoid.
1. Secondhand smoke causes health problems in others: This is irrevocably true. However, should cigarettes be banned? Hardly any one would argue this. Smoking a cigarette or cigar DOES NOT NECESSARILY lead to secondhand smoke. It only leads to this when the object is smoked in a public place. Cigarettes and cigars can just as easily be smoked in the privacy of one’s home. If company is present at home, a guest CAN EFFORTLESSLY choose to abandon the situation if they do not desire secondhand smoke. The NECESSARY cause of secondhand smoke is smoking in public, and this, if anything, may be subject to governmental intervention.
a) Counterargument: Smoking in the confines of one’s home when there is a child or baby present is unfair to their rights, as they cannot make a willful choice to leave the situation. Although this is true, marijuana is smoked much more infrequently than tobacco, and is not smoked enough to create a problem with secondhand smoke in the house. Also, marijuana use can easily be designated to one room, or one place in the house, greatly lowering contact with children. Furthermore, making marijuana illegal in NO WAY decreases the incentive for an individual to smoke in their house. If anything, it increases it, by forcing users to smoke in a private place where they cannot be seen.
2. The use of marijuana impairs the operation of automobiles: This is only somewhat true. As opposed to alcohol, which causes a total breakdown of logical thought, and severe impairment of the senses, as well as reaction time, marijuana users are aware of their limitations under the influence. Some studies have shown that drivers under the influence of marijuana make up for their impairment by driving slower and more defensively. Even if it was as bad as alcohol, marijuana CAN be used without NECESSARILY causing the user to operate an automobile. The NECESSARY event that should be made (and is) illegal is “driving under the influence”. An individual under the influence of marijuana still makes a solemn decision to place himself in that situation, and must face the consequences. A counterargument may be that marijuana robs the user of the free will to make the decision. This is false, because even when greatly intoxicated on marijuana, the user still has absolute and complete free will, as opposed to harder drugs. If one is still worried about the legalization of marijuana causing more people to drive intoxicated, then we may examine the option of increasing the punishment for this crime. This would do more good than outright banning the drug, as it reinforces incentive to NOT DRIVE INTOXICATED, whereas the banning of marijuana itself provides no extra incentive to not commit the actual crime.
3. The use of marijuana causes domestic abuse: This is nonsense. Marijuana simply does not cause violent behavior. Most violent behavior from drug use is caused by the legal drug alcohol.
4. The use of marijuana causes the ruin of loved ones: As most users of marijuana are only part-time and recreational, this is ridiculous. Even daily users rarely change their personality enough to significantly affect others. Even so, the government should not be involved here at all. Although it may hurt family and friends, the user has made his decision to take the drug. If they truly love him enough, they should intervene when they see that he is abusing the drug. If he still continues abusing marijuana, they can effortlessly abandon the situation.
C. Therefore, all cannabis products should be legalized. (Syllogism; A + B = C)
III. Myths and False Arguments for Marijuana Prohibition
In this section, the various arguments for marijuana prohibition will be addressed, and thoroughly debunked. Points next a roman numeral are general points that would be offered by a marijuana prohibitionist. Points next to capital letters are specific issues relating to the general subject. Any other points made are there to debunk the argument, unless otherwise stated.
A prohibitionist could only argue that marijuana should be illegal for the following reasons. Any other form of reasoning would directly contradict the consistent reasoning of our lawmaking, both theoretical, and in application.
I. Marijuana should be illegal because it a health threat.
A. Anything that negatively affects health should be illegal.
1. This is ethically wrong. Just because something can cause harm to an individual does not mean it is subject to government regulation. The government does not exist to prevent us from hurting ourselves, it exists to prevent us from forcing hurt upon each other, or to prevent the sale of chemical compounds that can be used to harm people on a massive scale.
2. If this were true, why are cigarettes and alcohol illegal? They are inarguably more dangerous to individual health than all illegal drugs combined. Furthermore, almost any product can be used in excess to cause extremely negative health effects. Obesity is far more dangerous than smoking marijuana. Should the government regulate how much we eat? Tanning beds greatly increase the chance of skin cancer. Should tanning be illegal? If this point held any weight at all, the government would have to regulate all of these things to be internally consistent. Where does one draw the line?
B. Marijuana is very addictive.
1. No, its not. There is no component in THC that is physically addicting. Furthermore, it is one of the least psychologically addicting drugs. It has been shown in scientific study that it is less addicting than nicotine, less addicting than alcohol, and even less addicting than caffeine.
C. Marijuana increase tolerance, causing the user to smoke more each time.
1. No, it doesn’t. Again, it has been scientifically proven that tolerance in marijuana in only increased by a fraction of a percent over time. Again, it increases tolerance less than nicotine, less than alcohol, and less than caffeine.
D. Marijuana withdrawal is difficult, causing health problems for the user.
1. No, it’s not. Marijuana has the lowest amount of withdrawal effects of any drug. A heavy user may experience anxiety or boredom after stopping use, but usually only for a few days. Once again, its withdrawal rate is lower than nicotine, alcohol, and caffeine.
E. Marijuana kills brain cells.
1. No, it doesn’t. Not even in heavy, long-term use. Recent scientific studies have found absolutely no evidence of brain cell deterioration over time. The basis for this myth is in an earlier study, controlled by the government, that involved suffocated rhesus monkeys with marijuana smoke for hours at a time. The resulting brain damage did not come from marijuana smoke, but lack of oxygen getting to the brain. The study has since been dismissed by the scientific community at large.
F. Marijuana causes problems with short and long-term memory loss.
1. Marijuana simply does not cause long term memory loss at all, period.
2. Marijuana causes short-term memory functions to be less efficient, WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE DRUG. When not under the influence of the drug, there are no changes to short-term memory function. In the case of heavier uses, they may experience some loss in function, but it is only because they are consistently under the influence, and their functionality would return upon the discontinuation of use.
G. Marijuana can cause mental illness.
1. There is no case study that has ever successfully provided a direct correlation between marijuana use and mental illness.
2. If anything, marijuana may rarely cause the awakening of mental illnesses that already existed within the individual. This is true of all drugs, but is almost nonexistent in the case of marijuana, as it is simply not that psychologically powerful.
H. Marijuana causes problems with hormone development.
1. This may or may not be true. Some studies have verified disturbances in sperm count or in growth hormones, while other studies have not found any such thing. The data on this is currently inconclusive.
I. Marijuana causes a lack of motivation.
1. No study has ever conclusively found any link between smoking marijuana and amotivational syndrome, even in heavy users. Some statistical studies have shown marijuana users on average hold higher-paying jobs than non-users. This is not to suggest that marijuana causes increased intelligence or productivity; it simply suggests that the above assertion is completely meaningless.
2. An assertion like this is a victim of the logical fallacy “correlation implies cause”. One cannot readily discern between marijuana causing laziness in people, or unmotivated people having a greater tendency to smoke marijuana than motivated people. Either one could account for a correlation, so this statement is invalid.
J. Smoking marijuana can increase the chances of throat/lung cancer.
1. This is true. However, it is not the act of ingesting marijuana that causes cancer, it is the act of smoking alone. Even so, tobacco users are at a much higher risk than marijuana users. Marijuana users smoke far less than tobacco users to get the same desired effect. The 400 chemicals in marijuana are benign, compared to the 1000+ chemicals in cigarettes, which range from benign to extremely harmful.
2. Marijuana can be orally ingested, eliminating the increased chance of cancer completely.
3. Marijuana can be vaporized, almost completely eliminating the increased chance of cancer.
K. Smoking marijuana while pregnant damages the fetus.
1. Evidence on this is currently inconclusive. Some studies say that it does, others have found marijuana has no effect on the fetus.
2. Even if this were true, one could simply choose to not smoke marijuana while pregnant. The end.
L. Smoking marijuana negatively affects one’s appearance.
1. What? Since when does the government regulate things based on how it makes people look?
2. The idea that marijuana causes long-term changes to one’s appearance is ridiculous. Marijuana CAN cause unwanted changes in appearance while under the influence of the drug, but they vanish when no longer under the influence.
M. The number one drug people are admitted to drug rehabilitation programs for is Marijuana.
1. This is technically true, but one also has to consider that a considerably larger number of Americans use marijuana, more than any other drug is used. The only way this statistic could be relevant is if one determined the percentage of admission for each drug, by dividing the number of users by the number of users admitted to rehabilitation.
2. This does not even indicate that marijuana is actually a health problem. More people are arrested for marijuana than any other drug. Often, an alternative to avoiding greater punishment is going to drug rehabilitation classes. This does not indicate that more people are concerned about their use, only that more people want to avoid jail time and fines.
N. Marijuana use negatively affects the immune system.
1. This is unconfirmed. Some studies that have shown this have since been disproved. Also, some studies have shown that marijuana may strengthen the immune system, in some cases.
O. Marijuana has become more potent over the years.
1. This is true. THC levels in the average marijuana sample have risen from 0.5% to 4.5% in the last thirty years. However, this is only a good thing for health. The only negative health effect of marijuana is caused by smoking, and if the drug is stronger, one needs to smoke less to get the same effect.
II. Marijuana should be illegal because it is a criminal threat.
A. Marijuana causes violence.
1. No, it doesn’t. The psychoactive effects of marijuana are the exact opposite of those that would cause violence. Alcohol often causes extremely violent outbursts. Again, if this is a valid reason, why is alcohol legal?
B. Being under the influence of marijuana causes car accidents.
1. It is true that driving under the influence of ANY psychoactive substance causes impairment, which MAY lead to accidents. However, in the vast majority of cases where marijuana was involved in car accidents, alcohol was also involved.
2. Driving while drunk and driving while high are COMPLETELY different. When one is drunk, coordination is significantly impaired, the feeling of restraint is significantly impaired, and the ability to make decisions is significantly impaired. When one is high, coordination is slightly impaired, the feeling of restraint is slightly impaired, and the ability to make decisions is unchanged. Therefore, a user of marijuana has the ability to make a decision not to drive, and if he does, drive with heightened caution, and lessened speed.
3. One can simply choose NOT to drive. It’s that simple. If marijuana were legalized, there is nothing to suggest that more people would choose to drive intoxicated, nor is there anything to suggest that more people would smoke marijuana, period. If one is genuinely concerned about cutting down on DUIs, then they would be much better off creating harsher sentences for those that do, and creative incentive, rather than banning a product.
4. Current drug laws allow policemen to charge someone with a DUI if ANY AMOUNT OF THC IS FOUND IN THEIR SYSTEM, AT ALL. THC can stay in one’s system for up to five weeks after being ingested. During this time, only the first few hours affect the individual in any noticeable way. This law is unethical, and exists because the government can, because of marijuana’s current illegal state.
C. Marijuana causes gang violence.
1. No, it doesn’t. The sale of soft drugs, such as marijuana, usually do not involve larger organizations, but rather independent dealers.
2. Gang violence IS caused by the sale of hard drugs, but this is because keeping them illegal causes a black market. If these drugs were legal, there would be no black market violence.
III. Marijuana should be illegal because it is an economic threat.
A. Marijuana would hurt the US economy if it were legal.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Marijuana could be regulated like other legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco. Therefore, it would be taxed accordingly, and all the untaxed money currently being spent on marijuana would be partially going back to our government.
2. If marijuana were legal, it would reason that all forms of hemp production would be legal. The widespread, large scale production of hemp would create billions upon billions of dollars in revenue for our country, and would save billions and billions of dollars on more costly, more inefficient, and more controlled products.
3. We pour billions of dollars into the arrest, detainment, and prosecution of marijuana users each year. If marijuana were legalized, this percentage of our annual budget would be completely freed.
B. Marijuana legalization would cause a rise in health-care costs.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Any increase in health care costs caused by legalization would be covered by a fraction of the increase in government revenue.
2. If marijuana were legalized, users would not be arrested, and therefore wouldn’t be persuaded into admitting themselves into rehabilitation that they didn’t need in the first place.
C. Marijuana legalization would cause a loss in job productivity.
1. No, it wouldn’t. Again, there has never been any correlation between marijuana use and amotivational syndrome. Try telling this to the millions of hard-working marijuana users who take great pride in their work.
2. Only on-the-job use of marijuana would cause this to happen. If this does happen, it would be immediately noticeable, and the employer could then simply choose to fire the inadequate worker. This is the same thing done with alcohol abusers. What is the difference?
D. Marijuana is a costly habit.
1. Why should the government have any input? So is collecting models. So is buying cigarettes and alcohol. So is any habit.
2. If one honestly cared about this, then they would want to legalize marijuana. Marijuana is only fairly expensive because it is part of an unregulated black market. If marijuana were legalized, it would sell for a fraction of the current price.
E. The sale of marijuana funds terrorist organizations.
1. Doubtful. Any money that would come from drugs, and go to terrorist organizations, comes from harder drugs. There is a highly profitable heroin and cocaine black market that gives money to terrorists, but not marijuana.
2. Even if this were true, that’s because IT’S CURRENTLY ILLEGAL. If marijuana were legal, the money would be going to businesses, and our government, instead.
3. A major market that does pump money into the hands of terrorists is the oil market. Saudis who make billions off of oil regularly give percentages of their money to terrorist organizations. If marijuana were legal, hempseed oil would be legal too. Hempseed oil is just as efficient at fueling automobiles, and would nearly eliminate our dependency on the people who REGULARLY fund terrorists.
IV. Marijuana should be illegal because it is immoral.
A. Something that is immoral should be illegal.
1. No, absolutely not. Morality is extremely subjective, and cannot possibly be designated by a large governmental infrastructure. 2,500 years of philosophical debate has not really turned up any certainties in the case of morality, so why should a group of politically motivated bureaucrats even begin to think they could deal out the ‘right’ morality? The best a government can do for its people is protect its people from harmful actions against one another. Thanks to our (mostly) wonderful constitution, the US government can only get involved in our actions, not our thoughts, and certainly not abstract moral ideas.
2. Law does not equal morality. It is a very weak individual who lives his life by law alone. Law is just the current set of rules that a government, at that specific time, feels is best for keeping the peace and strengthening the country. It has little to do with pure ethics, and nothing to do with morals.
B. Marijuana is religiously immoral.
1. The only religions that specifically outlaw the use of any type of drug are Islam (some forms outlaw alcohol) and Mormonism (outlaws all types of drug use). Most other religions are vague or indifferent to this issue of drug use. Some passages in the Christian Bible seem to be against the use of drugs, while other passages seem to actually promote the healthful use of drugs. Many religions even hold drug use as their cornerstone, dating back to the oldest form of religion. Rastafarianism SPECIFICALLY recommends marijuana use to seek a spiritual path.
2. Even if this were true, so what? Church and state are separated for a reason; everyone has different religious beliefs, and if the government started running itself based on any religious ideal, it would undoubtedly cause the suffering of millions.
C. Drug use is immoral.
1. Based on what? This statement is often used and almost never backed with any explanation.
2. What is considered drug use? Just hard drugs? Just illegal drugs? Are alcohol and tobacco immoral? Is caffeine immoral? Is sugar immoral? The word “drug” is way too vague to convey any kind of meaningful opinion. Where does one draw the line?
D. The legalization of marijuana sends a negative message to our kids.
1. What message is that?
2. Just because something is legal does not mean that it is culturally OK to imbibe in. Gambling is legal, but that doesn’t mean everyone considers it moral. Having sex before marriage is legal, but society generally frowns upon it. If marijuana were legal, it would mean marijuana was legal. That’s it. It’s not a government endorsement.
3. No, a negative message to send to kids is “don’t do that, because I said so, because its illegal, and its completely wrong if you even do it once”. If you tell your kids not to do something without giving them logical reasons, it only makes them withdraw from you, and trust your opinion less. If you tell them not to do something because its illegal, it teaches them that morality should come from the law, which it shouldn’t. A zero tolerance attitude towards drugs is as effective of a teaching as is a zero tolerance attitude towards sex. Teaching kids to abstain from sex doesn’t help, it just leaves them uneducated when they eventually have sex anyway. The positive message to send to kids is educating them on the facts, teaching that careful experimentation and moderation is not morally wrong, and allowing them to make their own decisions as human beings, not as slaves afraid of punishment.
V. Miscellaneous Arguments
A. Marijuana is a gateway drug that leads to harder drugs.
1. There is absolutely no correlation between marijuana and hard drugs when looking at their effects. Marijuana belongs to a group of drugs called “hallucinogens”, where as cocaine is a “stimulant” and heroin is a “barbiturate”. It is assumed that one takes the drug based on its desired effect. A marijuana or LSD user would expect hallucination. A user of cocaine expects to be stimulated. A user of heroin expects to be calmed. Pot smokers may not have any interest whatsoever in speeding up or slowing down, only hallucinating.
2. This theory is based upon an incredibly old logical fallacy, “correlation implies cause”. It may be observed that marijuana users will move onto hard drugs, but this in absolutely no way implies that marijuana CAUSES this. Marijuana is the most common, cheapest, well known, weakest intoxicant. Of course, if someone is naturally inclined to use drugs, they will start with marijuana. Saying that marijuana leads to harder drugs is as irrefutably ridiculous as saying “learning addition leads to majoring in calculus” or “reading about bombs leads to one becoming a terrorist”. In all of these cases, it is simply LOGICAL that one PREDISPOSED to an interest would start with the SIMPLEST element in the field.
3. The majority of scientific studies have already completely disproved the gateway theory as having no merit whatsoever. Some studies have even concluded that the use of marijuana discourages one from moving onto harder drugs, by distracting them with a cheap and effective substance that does not increase tolerance, cause addiction, or cause withdrawal symptoms.
B. Our marijuana prohibition is currently working.
1. No, its not. Since the Nixon Administration, the percentage of teenagers who have used marijuana has not gone down, it has slightly risen. The same goes for teenagers who regularly use marijuana. Our policies are not working.
2. Any policy that justifies pouring billions of dollars each year into a battle that is never won, or even dented, is a failed policy.
3. Any policy that imprisons non-violent, harmless citizens, and labels them “felons” is a failed policy.
4. Any policy that unnecessarily creates a multi-billion dollar black market is a failed policy.
C. If marijuana were legalized, the number of users would dramatically increase.
1. No, it wouldn’t. In a comprehensive study of drug-use in schools, the question was asked, “how would your drug habits change if marijuana was legalized?” Of those polled, 59% felt that they would still have nothing to do with it regardless of legal status. 17% said their current drug habits would not change at all. Only 7.1% said they would increase their use, and 8.4% said they would consider trying it.
2. In Amsterdam, where marijuana is legal to purchase and use, the amount of users in their country has not risen since legalization. There was a slight peak in use immediately after the law went into effect, and then its been normal since. Also, they have half the number of teenager users, as compared to the US.
IV. A Brief Summary of Arguments for Marijuana Reform
1. It is unethical to make illegal something that does not necessarily cause one person to harm another, in a way that person can reasonably avoid.
2. There are no massive health problems associated with marijuana.
3. We are wasting billions of dollars each year on a failed policy.
4. We could be gaining billions of dollars each year on taxable revenue.
5. We could be gaining billions of dollars each year from the growth of hemp, which can create thousands of useful products.
6. Hemp could produce paper, which would eliminate the need to cut down trees.
7. Hemp could produce fuel, which would eliminate our dependency on crude oil.
8. Marijuana is a naturally therapeutic substance that could enrich the lives of millions now suffering from health problems.
9. Hempseed could enrich the diet of millions of people.
10. There are no crime problems directly associated with marijuana use.
11. Marijuana and hemp are currently illegal because of big business lobbyists and massive racist propaganda campaigns. The decorticator, the hemp version of the cotton gin, was finally developed, eliminating cotton’s production advantage. Shortly thereafter, the cotton companies, specifically DuPont, lobbied the US government to make illegal marijuana, inventing all sorts of ridiculous and untruthful propaganda. The term ‘marijuana’ was new at this point to the US vernacular, and the bill banning marijuana passed without hesitation. It was only after the passing of the bill that the congressmen found out hemp and marijuana came from the same plant.
12. If every single one of these arguments fails, WHY ARE CIGARETTES AND ALCOHOL LEGAL?