ReageraMera

The legalization or decriminalization of marihuana is a bad idea for several reasons. Let's look at some of the arguments for and against this idea:

Marihuana is not a harmful drug and, in any case, it is far less harmful than alcohol and/or tobacco, both of which are legal drugs for adults.

Response: While alcohol and tobacco are indeed harmful drugs, this alone should not persuade us to add yet another harmful drug to our repertoire of harmful drugs. Perhaps we instead might learn from our experiences with alcohol and tobacco and keep the marihuana genie in the bottle. Marihuana is a potent neurotoxin that if used excessively may lead to severe and lasting psychosis. Marihuana use frequently accompanies and exacerbates other co-morbid behavioral disorders. As for its physical effects, smoking anything, including marihuana, is harmful to the smoker as well as to those around him or her.

Marihuana has medicinal uses and at least 13 states already have recognized this by making it lawful for people with certain illnesses to grow and possess marihuana for medicinal purposes.

Response: Many medicines, including important cancer drugs, trace their origins to plants, so it is no surprise that the cannabis plant contains molecules that are therapeutically beneficial. Many potent analgesics trace their structural origin to opium, the gum of the poppy plant. But, just as doctors would not advise patients to smoke opium to dull pain, they should not recommend smoking crude marihuana for therapeutic purposes. During Prohibition, only doctors could prescribe whiskey, wine, or beer and only for "medicinal purposes." Intoxication, as a form of medical treatment, has no place in modern medicine. For over a hundred years we have relied on the FDA to protect our food and drug supply. We defeat this when we "approve" a toxic substance like marihuana through the political process rather than through scientific examination. Even though most states that have approved medical marihuana restrict it for patients with serious illnesses, we find that the regulations often include ambiguous language allowing its use for almost any reason.

A recent poll in California showed that 54 percent of voters believe that marihuana should be legalized and taxed to make up for the current fiscal problems besetting that state.

Response: This approach was already tried and it failed. Seventy-two years ago, Congress enacted the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. It required physicians wishing to prescribe marihuana for medical purposes to pay an annual registration fee of one dollar. It also required a small tax on every transaction. In 1969, the Supreme Court struck down key provisions of the 1937 law. In its review, the Court noted that during its 32-year history, the Act had generated little tax revenue. When it comes to marihuana, it is unlikely that the government could ever compete successfully with the private sector as the nation's drug dealer. Taxes seem to work best for things that cannot easily be made at home, like tires, gasoline, whiskey, and cigarettes.

The arrest and incarceration of non-violent marihuana offenders gives the U.S. a per capita incarceration rate that is the highest in the world and the fiscal and social costs of this are excessive.

We first need to recognize that the U.S.is the world's largest importer of crime, including drug crime, and that much of the marihuana found in our nation comes from beyond our borders. Almost one-third of all federal prisoners, including those doing time for drug violations, are non-citizens and, while we do not have statistics for state prisons, it is likely that the percentage of non-citizens is just as high, if not higher, in state prisons. The U.S. also is one of only a handful of nations that incarcerates non-citizens for drug law violations and will extradite and prosecute foreign-based drug kingpins. Most defendants imprisoned for marihuana violations have pled guilty to reduced charges and this often makes it appear that they are serving time for simple "possession," although, in most of these cases, the original charges were more serious. And, contrary to popular thinking, marihuana trafficking accounts for a good deal of violence, much of it aimed at innocent persons in the form of child abuse, spouse abuse, and elder abuse, to cite just a few notable examples. Finally, the cost of drug control, while not insignificant, is not as onerous as one may think. For example, President Obama has requested $14.1 billion for drug control in fiscal year 2009. This represents one-tenth of one percent of our annual GDP (approximately $13.84 trillion). The potential saving of lives and productivity that otherwise might be lost to drugs makes this a modest investment in the public health and safety of our fellow citizens.

I am master of my body and the government has no right to tell me what to do or not to do with my own body.  

In 1962, the Supreme Court in Robinson v. California declared that just being an alcoholic, drug addict, prostitute, or vagrant did not in itself constitute a crime. Thus, one indeed may be free to do whatever he or she wants to do with his or her own body but the government, in its role of protecting the public, may exercise a corresponding right to regulate certain behavior and things, including drugs, that are deemed threats to public health or safety.

These are some of the more frequently heard pros and cons in this debate. This year, like the three prior years, the Drug Enforcement Administration will approve the use of almost five tons of marihuana by authorized registrants, many of whom are researching the therapeutic uses of marihuana. In the laboratory, chemists have been able to isolate and remove the specific particles responsible for the psychic effect or "high" associated with marihuana use. This, they believe, will enable them to synthesize the truly beneficial molecules and concentrate them in higher dosage strengths for more effective medical use. Two cannabinoid drugs have been approved by the FDA, thus far, and more potent ones without the psychic side effect may be on the way.

John J. Coleman, PhD

President

Drug Watch International (http://www.drugwatch.org/)

Dr. Coleman is a retired Assistant Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration