PERSPECTIVE: COURT AND CONGRESS WAGING HYPOCRITICAL DRUG WAR

No doubt some of the people who support the use of medical marijuana are
disingenuous--what they really want is to be able to grow and smoke their
own. That doesn't mean they don't believe marijuana can be helpful to some
sick people, just that their main objective is securing the right to
legally toke up themselves, not providing aid and comfort to terminal patients.

That is fine.

Some of my friends probably smoke pot. There are probably pot smokers in
this newsroom. And whether you know it or not, you're probably in the same
position I am.

I don't know who these dope fiends are, and I wouldn't care to guess. I
almost never speculate on who might use marijuana and who might not. There
are certain risks a person may or may not consider worth taking but it's
difficult to understand how my pot-smoking friends are doing anything very
wrong. Technically they may be breaking the law, but pot smokers are hardly
a public menace to anyone.

That doesn't mean I approve of smoking marijuana. It is against the law and
I do try to obey the law. I wouldn't put myself in a position to risk my
neat job or my comfortable life because I believe prohibition is wrong. I'm
not that interested in the mood-altering affects of cannabis--even in
Amsterdam I stayed out of the coffee houses because they were either seedy
or overcrowded with tourists.

If I think anything about my friends' pot-smoking at all I guess I consider
it something less than an act of civil disobedience; I don't think it's a
political act but something rather more quaint, a nostalgic indulgence to
remind themselves how wild and free they used to be. I don't see it as much
different from riding a motorcycle--except that riding a motorcycle is more
dangerous and more fun.

I feel bad about the Supreme Court's decision that they can't argue with
Congress about the medical usefulness of marijuana. If cancer patients
believe marijuana helps them, then they ought to have access to it. And if
people want to grow and smoke a green leafy substance, then I think that's
their business.

One of the great things about this country is that you don't have to be
brave to write a newspaper column. A coward could say these things I want
to say about these stupid laws without putting himself in jeopardy. I
wouldn't risk anything to argue for the decriminalization of marijuana; I
like to think I'd save myself for something more important than any
imagined right to get high.

My position on marijuana is a little complicated: I've never really felt
too bad for the people who claim their "religion" considers marijuana use a
sacrament and that they should be legally entitled to grow their own on
"church" property. It's not a church just because you call it a church. I
don't mind laws that encourage dope-smokers to use a little
discretion--maybe smoking dope in public should be a finable offense.

There's a real possibility the decriminalization of marijuana would
increase the use of this drug in this country. Maybe that's not such a good
thing--marijuana isn't any worse than booze but prolonged smoking can sap
one's ambition and fog one's brain and it can't be good for one's lungs.

While I don't credit those who claim that it's health-giving and wholesome,
I'm pretty sure that it actually helps some sick people stay alive by
stimulating dormant appetites. In some cases it can relieve nausea and it
certainly makes some terminally ill people feel better.

Willfully introducing a mind-altering substance into one's body may be
morally suspect and medically unwise, but it ought not be, in itself, a
crime. That is one libertarian idea that makes absolute sense; the
government's influence should, at the very least, stop at the epidermis.

I'm not sure I want big business marketing marijuana. In California and
Arizona, the ad hoc cannabis clubs seem to have done a relatively good job
at supplying it to people who either need or desperately want the drug.
Legalization might bring a whole new set of problems. For now the best
policy might be to simply relax the already erratic enforcement of the laws
against marijuana possession.

In other words, if you want to smoke dope, OK, you can smoke dope, but
please try to use a little discretion.

Most people understand what marijuana is; while we don't have connections
or toke up regularly we aren't dumb. We've had some experiences, we know
that there is a qualitative difference between marijuana and harder drugs
like cocaine and heroin.

I've never bought marijuana in my life but if I had to get a bag tomorrow
it would probably take me two phone calls.

Maybe less.

If they sold packs of marijuana--shrink-wrapped with tax stamps
affixed--down at the local convenience store, most of us wouldn't bother
experimenting. A lot of potheads would smoke more dope if it were cheaper,
easier to procure and they didn't have to deal with unsavory drug-dealer
types. But so what?

That doesn't mean that driving under the influence of a mind-altering
substance, or supplying an underage person with such a substance, shouldn't
constitute a crime. Society certainly has an interest in protecting itself
from the addled and the impaired, and it should certainly take measures to
control and discourage the use of drugs.

What most people have come to understand is the so-called War on Drugs, and
particularly the War on Marijuana, is irrational. It is difficult to
conceive a more stupid response to the eradication of the public health
problems illicit drugs create in this country. It is not a war on drugs at
all, but a war on the rights of citizens. It is--whether by design or
happenstance--an instrument by which the government can continue to expand
its influence at the expense of personal liberty.

Of course, sick people should be given drugs that help them. Terminal
patients ought to be allowed to smoke marijuana if that's how they--and
their doctors--choose to deal with their discomfort. The only reason that
this subject is open for debate is because there are disingenuous
politicians--some of whom have admitted that they "experimented" with
marijuana in their youth--who believe that there is still political capital
to be made.

This bipartisan hypocrisy maintains a war on pot ought to bother all of us.
We ought to be discouraged by a Supreme Court that chooses to sustain a
legal fiction minted by Congress--that there is no valid medical use for
marijuana--rather than see the truth.