Should marihuana be legalized? My Philosophy prof. from College says it should...?

Question

A few weeks ago at college, the guy who teaches me philosophy told the class that he has published some works describing his point of view on society. One of them is that marihuana has no reason to be illegal. Should marihuana be legalized?

Answer 1

Sure...along with that legalization comes some very interesting drawbacks. There would have to be a law in place for operating a motor vehicle...submit to a blood test to measure the amount of THC in your system or we throw you in the brig for the night.
Basically (here in Canada) everything the government gets their hands on they screw up.

I think it should simply be decriminalized.

Answer 2

All things considered, I'd say that marijuana is probably a less dangerous drug overall than alcohol---but I sure don't want anyone who's been using either substance to be operating a motor vehicle or handling a common carrier (plane, train, bus).

I'd personally rather see pot taxed to a fare-thee-well and regulated, but can't figure out how we can effectively keep it out of the hands of minors, which WILL be a problem if it becomes legal. (See the comparison examples of tobacco and alcohol.) Identifying motor vehicle operators may also be a problem, since don't think there's an effective "breath test" out yet.

FWIW, I've never seen anyone on *just plain* marijuana get aggressive, but have dealt with plenty of nasty drunks. And alcohol is involved in a very substantial proportion of suicides, homicides, violent assaults, and domestic violence cases.

Also FWIW, SassB---you may want to check out _Reefer Madness_ by Eric Schlosser (he's the guy who wrote _Fast Food Nation_), for his discussions concerning current inequities in marijuana sentencing versus other criminal acts. Rather surprising.

Suspect that we lost quite some ground on the War Against Drugs when the Evil Demon Weed Marijuana was talked up in the 60s, and when "kids" found out that the stories about _that_ were false, decided that a lot of the other drug stories from the Establishment were _also_ so much BS. Baaaad move; you lose credibility when you put out a story and can't back it with solid facts.

Answer 3

I can't speak for your professor, but some people who support legalization don't actually condone its use. I know - on the surface that sounds like a contradiction. Some people believe that legislating morals doesn't work.

I don't know that I would go as far as to legalize drugs. But if you notice, the War on Drugs has actually made the problem worse instead of better. The whole thing was a political maneuver to convince people drugs could actually be eradicated (and, in the process, get someone reelected).

Answer 4

Yes. But I don't think legalizing it would cut down on the amount of drug related crime and imprisonment that costs society so many resources. I can't imagine there are that many people serving prison sentences for smoking pot. If our country really wanted to cut down on the high costs of the war on drugs, we would need to legalize cocaine, crack, and some other hard drugs. And that's not too likely to happen, which is unfortunate because the energy and money we put into the war on drugs would be much better directed towards fighting terrorism.

Answer 5

If you can fight and die for your country,then you should be able to smoke pot! but it would aslo be used by some very irresponsable people, the same people that act very stupid when they have a few drinks. So in other words Stupid people should be outlawed not the products they use

Answer 6

Myth: Smoking marijuana can cause cancer and serious lung damage.
Fact: The chance of contracting cancer from smoking marijuana is minuscule. Tobacco smokers typically smoke 20+ cigarettes every day for decades, but virtually nobody smokes marijuana in the quantity and frequency required to cause cancer. A 1997 UCLA study (see page 9) concluded that even prolonged and heavy marijuana smoking causes no serious lung damage. Cancer risks from common foods (meat, salt, dairy products) far exceed any cancer risk posed by smoking marijuana. Respiratory health hazards and cancer risks can be totally eliminated by ingesting marijuana in baked foods.




For the first 162 years of America's existence, marijuana was totally legal and hemp was a common crop. But during the 1930s, the U.S. government and the media began spreading outrageous lies about marijuana, which led to its prohibition. Some headlines made about marijuana in the 1930s were: "Marijuana: The assassin of youth." "Marijuana: The devil's weed with roots in hell." "Marijuana makes fiends of boys in 30 days." "If the hideous monster Frankenstein came face to face with the monster marijuana, he would drop dead of fright." In 1936, the liquor industry funded the infamous movie titled Reefer Madness. This movie depicts a man going insane from smoking marijuana, and then killing his entire family with an ax. This campaign of lies, as well as other evidence, have led many to believe there may have been a hidden agenda behind Marijuana Prohibition.

Shortly before marijuana was banned by The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, new technologies were developed that made hemp a potential competitor with the newly-founded synthetic fiber and plastics industries. Hemp's potential for producing paper also posed a threat to the timber industry (see New Billion-Dollar Crop). Evidence suggests that commercial interests having much to lose from hemp competition helped propagate reefer madness hysteria, and used their influence to lobby for Marijuana Prohibition. It is not known for certain if special interests conspired to destroy the hemp industry via Marijuana Prohibition, but enough evidence exists to raise the possibility.

After Alcohol Prohibition ended in 1933, funding for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (now the Drug Enforcement Administration) was reduced. The FBN's own director, Harry J. Anslinger, then became a leading advocate of Marijuana Prohibition. In 1937 Anslinger testified before Congress in favor of Marijuana Prohibition by saying: "Marijuana is the most violence causing drug in the history of mankind." "Most marijuana smokers are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes." Marijuana Prohibition is founded on lies and rooted in racism, prejudice, and ignorance. Just as politicians believed Harry J. Anslinger to be a marijuana expert in 1937, many people still believe law enforcement officials are marijuana experts. In reality, law enforcement officials have no expert knowledge of marijuana's medical or health effects, but they do represent an industry that receives billions of tax dollars to enforce Marijuana Prohibition.

Before the government began promoting reefer madness hysteria during the 1930s, the word marijuana was a Mexican word that was totally absent from the American vocabulary. In the 1930s, Americans knew that hemp was a common, useful, and harmless crop. It is extremely unlikely anyone would have believed hemp was dangerous, or would have believed stories of hemp madness. Thus, the words marijuana and reefer were substituted for the word hemp in order to frighten the public into supporting Hemp Prohibition. Very few people realized that marijuana and hemp came from the same plant species; thus, virtually nobody knew that Marijuana Prohibition would destroy the hemp industry.

Bolstering the theory that marijuana was banned to destroy the hemp industry, two articles were written on the eve of Marijuana Prohibition that claim hemp was on the verge of becoming a super crop. These articles appeared in two well-respected magazines that are still published today.

Answer 7

If cigarettes are legal and alcohol is legal than marijuana should be legal. Cigarettes and alcohol will do worse things to you than pot will any day.