The U.S Government blog Tina's view on politics has an entry titled “Should Marijuana be legalized” in which the author, Tina, opposed legalization of marijuana. Tina supports her claim with “Marijuana should [not] be legalized for consumption of any kind because of the lasting effects that it has on the brain of a human. Marijuana has a lasting effect of memory damage to a humans brain.” I do not agree with Tina and here is my counter argument.
First I would like to address Tina’s statement on the long term health effects to a persons memory. Here are three very credible sources, webmd.com, wikipedia.org, and drugabuse.gov, which do not mention anything along the lines to the correlation between marijuana and long term memory damage. In fact, the only clearly proven effects of marijuana stated by these sites are short term effects. The long term effects are still inconclusive and require further research. Here are some quotes from each website, “The link has never been proven” (Webmd), “Though the long-term effects of cannabis have been studied, there remains much to be concluded.” (Wikipedia), “More research is still needed to confirm and better understand these linkages.” (Drugabuse). Here is a great video explaining how the active chemical in marijuana (THC) affects the brain.
Secondly, I would like to discuss legality of drugs in general. If the effects of the drug on a persons health determines legality, why is alcohol and tobacco legal? Cdc.gov provides a list of proven immediate and long term health risks much more severe then marijuana. Here is an interesting chart I came across which rates drugs based on dependency and physical harm. As you can see, there are many drugs such as cannabis (marijuana), LSD, and ecstasy; which are all less dependent and does less physical harm then tobacco and alcohol, but are still illegal.
My question was why some substances are legal and others are not? As Noam Chomsky has said, “Very commonly substances are criminalized because they’re associated with what’s called the dangerous classes.” which means the association of particular drugs with stigmatized groups—the poor and racial minorities. Historian Richard Miller is summarized in GQ magazine as saying, “When Chinese immigrants began to crowd out jobs for white people in California, opium consumption suddenly became a crime. Hemp was legal and consumed in a variety of forms until it became a way to reduce economic competition from Mexicans. Cocaine, notoriously, was consumed in polite society throughout the century, but was not the subject of police attention until blacks migrated North to escape the Jim Crowified South.”
I think all drugs should legalized. Harvard University professor Jeffrey Miron has advocated the legalization of drugs for decades. In a Spiegel online interview, he explains why prohibition is more dangerous than selling drugs in supermarkets. To summarize the interview, here are some of the benefits Miron describes; The United States could save $85 billion to $90 billion per year, reduced violence by eliminating the black market, and my favorite quote of all, “Americans claim to believe in -- freedom, individuality, personal responsibility -- you have to legalize drugs. The maxim should be that you're allowed to do it if you're not harming anyone else.” Not allowing someone to consume a drug in the privacy of their home in the pursuit of happiness is taking away their unalienable rights.
