A DOCTOR'S CASE FOR LEGAL POT

Most Americans are paying too much for marijuana.

I'm not referring to people who smoke it--using the drug generally
costs about as much as using alcohol. Marijuana is unaffordable for
the rest of America because billions are wasted on misdirected drug
education and distracted law enforcement, and we also fail to tax the
large underground economy that supplies cannabis. On Monday, the New
Jersey legislature passed a bill legalizing marijuana for a short
list of medical uses. Outgoing Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine says he
will sign it into law. This is a positive step, as cannabis has
several unique medical applications. But the debate over medical
marijuana has obscured the larger issue of pot prohibition.

As a psychiatrist, I treat individuals who often suffer from
devastating substance abuse.

Over many years of dealing with my patients' problems, I have come to
realize that we are wasting precious resources on the fight against
marijuana, which more closely resembles legal recreational drugs than
illegal ones. My conscience compels me to support a comprehensive and
nationwide decriminalization of marijuana.

Prohibition did decrease alcoholism and alcohol consumption in the
1920s. However, the resulting rise of violent organized crime and the
loss of tax revenue were untenable and led to the repeal of
Prohibition. By analogy, while the broad decriminalization of
marijuana will likely reduce the societal and economic costs of pot
prohibition, it could lead to more use and abuse. The risks of
marijuana use are mild compared to those of heroin, ecstasy and other
illegal drugs, but the drug is not harmless.

A small number of my patients cannot tolerate any use without serious
impact on underlying disorders. Others become daily, heavy smokers,
manifesting psychological if not physiological dependence. While most
of my patients appear to suffer no ill effects from occasional use,
the drug makes my work more difficult with certain individuals.

So why do I support decriminalization? First, marijuana prohibition
doesn't prevent widespread use of the drug, although it does clog our
legal system with a small percentage of users and dealers unlucky
enough to be prosecuted. More to the point, legal cannabis would
never become the societal problem that alcohol already is.

In most of my substance-abuse patients, I am far more concerned about
their consumption of booze than pot. Alcohol frequently induces
violent or dangerous behavior and often-irreversible physiological
dependence; marijuana does neither.

Chronic use of cannabis raises the risk of lung cancer, weight gain,
and lingering cognitive changes--but chronic use of alcohol can cause
pancreatitis, cirrhosis and permanent dementia.

In healthy but reckless teens and young adults, it is frighteningly
easy to consume a lethal dose of alcohol, but it is almost impossible
to do so with marijuana. Further, compared with cannabis, alcohol can
cause severe impairment of judgment, which results in greater
concurrent use of hard drugs. Many believe marijuana is a gateway
drug--perhaps not so harmful in itself but one that leads to the use
of more serious drugs.

That is not borne out in practice, except that the illegal purchase
of cannabis often exposes consumers to profit-minded dealers who push
the hard stuff.

In this way, the gateway argument is one in favor of
decriminalization. If marijuana were purchased at liquor stores
rather than on street corners where heroin and crack are also sold,
there would likely be a decrease in the use of more serious drugs.

The nation badly needs the revenue of a "sin tax" on marijuana, akin
to alcohol and tobacco taxes.

Our government could also save money by ending its battle against
marijuana in the drug war and redirecting funds to proactive drug
education and substance-abuse treatment.

Hyperbolic rants about the evils of marijuana could give way to
realistic public education about the drug's true risks, such as
driving under the influence. Our nation can acknowledge the dangers
of cigarettes, alcohol and marijuana while still permitting their
use. The only logically and morally consistent argument for marijuana
prohibition necessitates the criminalization of all harmful
recreational drugs, including alcohol, nicotine and caffeine.

We can agree that such an infringement on personal freedoms is as
impractical as it is un-American. The time has come to accept that
our nation's attitude toward marijuana has been misguided for
generations and that the only rational approach to cannabis is to
legalize, regulate and tax it.