SUPPORT POT LEGALIZATION AS A MATTER OF JUSTICE

Re "NAACP looks fogbound on legalizing pot" (Our Region, July 4): In
his column, Marcos Breton obscures and conflates issues in his
criticism of the NAACP's endorsement of the marijuana legalization initiative.

It's true that the NAACP has an unusual take on the legalization
issue, but I doubt that it believes white voters will cast a vote in
favor of legalizing marijuana simply because they're calling this a
racial justice issue. The NAACP is speaking primarily to their
constituents: California's African American voters.

Breton presupposes that Thurgood Marshall would be horrified by the
NAACP's stance. But how can we know what Marshall would say about
this or any other issue if he were living in 2010? Declaring that
getting stoned doesn't advance the cause of the NAACP's mission
overlooks important points. For one thing, any debate on whether
smoking marijuana is or isn't a worthwhile activity can only elicit a
subjective response.

In this case, the NAACP is raising a more fundamental concern, and
that is whether it's fair and acceptable for African Americans to be
arrested in disproportionate numbers to whites for engaging in the
same activity.

Besides, it's a slippery slope to suggest that there's a single
standard for determining which issues merit redress and which ones don't.

By endorsing the marijuana legalization measure, the NAACP is
implicitly acknowledging that it believes marijuana to be a
relatively harmless drug that should be decriminalized and that
African Americans are unfairly singled out for marijuana-related arrests.

If only it was as easy as Breton supposes that onerous laws and bad
policing can be undone by the NAACP or other organizations once the
right paperwork is filed with the courts.

As an example, mandatory-minimum sentencing in 1986 is still in place
nationwide despite organized reform efforts and a preponderance of
evidence that these sentencing guidelines disproportionately
incarcerate African Americans.

Breton ascribes fear-mongering and alarmist 1930s attributes to
marijuana, attributes more appropriately reserved for crack cocaine,
meth or heroin.

A decades-old question is whether marijuana is more beneficial or
harmful than alcohol. Drinking can be an enjoyable or unhealthy and
dangerous pastime depending on who is drinking and how much is consumed.

And it was illegal once, too, for many of the conventionally accepted
reasons that marijuana is currently prohibited for recreational use.

A thoughtful public debate on this issue is what's needed. The NAACP
has offered an alternate perspective for supporting the marijuana
legalization effort in California. In a perfect world, we'll consider
the reasons for its endorsement, along with other objective and
anecdotal information, to arrive at an informed opinion on this
important policy question.