MARIJUANA

Let's Find Better Causes to Serve, and Bigger Dragons to Slay

The weed isn't worth it, in more ways than one.

Alaskans -- with the exception of some medical patients -- are better
off not smoking marijuana. And Alaska law enforcement is better off
concentrating its efforts on more dangerous drugs, like methamphetamine.

But the governor and allies in the Legislature were determined to
recriminalize the use of small amounts of marijuana in the privacy of
the home and succeeded in doing so by including provisions in a bill
aimed at the meth trade.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska has sued to block the
new marijuana law, arguing that it violates Alaskans' fundamental
rights to privacy in their own homes, a view that has a history of
support from the Alaska Supreme Court. The court has twice ruled that
possession of small amounts for personal use in one's own home is
protected by the Alaska Constitution.

So now we can expect an expensive battle in court, with dueling
expert witnesses about modern pot's potency and danger, passionate
calls for public health, and passionate calls for individual freedom.

Spare us.

Would that common sense ruled the day. We already have laws that give
police the means to halt the trade in marijuana, to arrest someone
for smoking marijuana in public, to arrest them for growing
operations. What the state Supreme Court has found in the past is
that, on balance, marijuana is not such a threat to society that its
use in the home should be considered criminal.

Is there a contradiction here? Yes, possession in the home usually
means purchase outside the home. But this contradiction served a
practical purpose. If someone wished to indulge in their kitchen, law
enforcers weren't going to waste precious resources on them. If
someone aimed to profit by that indulgence, that was a different story.

The argument today is that marijuana is a far more potent and
addictive drug than the weed of the flower children. There isn't
agreement on these issues, but there's no question that marijuana
alters perceptions, reactions and abilities in the short term and can
have debilitating effects with long-term usage. So does alcohol. So
does tobacco.

Alcohol and tobacco are legal substances, and the point here isn't to
argue and compare but to put marijuana in perspective. Even this
year's legislation makes a stab at perspective by softening the new
outlaw status for pot users. It limits fines and prohibits jail time
for most people caught with the drug in their homes (with exceptions
for multiple offenses). But that also seems to contradict the very
claim by backers of the legislation that even the smallest amount of
marijuana is harmful and worthy of criminal prosecution.

Then there are opponents of the legislation who call for the
protection of fundamental rights to privacy in the home, as if the
defense of marijuana use were another noble step on the long march to
human freedom. Again, spare us. Police and troopers in Alaska aren't
about to invade homes and cuff some poor, stoned soul with the
munchies. Alaska's public safety crew has higher priorities.

On balance, Alaskans would be better off if lawmakers had zeroed in
on meth and left the marijuana law where it was. In Alaska, we tend
to err on the side of individual freedom. If the legal battle serves
any purpose, maybe it will promote a sharp debate about marijuana's
dangers and the balance of rights and responsibilities in a free
society. An intelligent debate on those issues requires a clear head.
Those requirements should discourage marijuana use.

BOTTOM LINE: All right, let's have a marijuana fight. Again. But
there's little to gain, no matter who wins.