EVEN WITHOUT INHALING, MINDS ARE CLOUDED OVER MARIJUANA

IT has wisely been observed that marijuana makes people mad. Not so
much the substance itself, more the mere mention of it.

Anybody who has ever included the legalisation of marijuana in an
election programme will be aware of the immediate common reaction.

This is a suicide note. Your rivals will have you tagged as a
dope-head and a moral danger to vulnerable children. Better withdraw
from the contest, lie low, never to mention the matter again.

More than half the people who say this will go on to insist that they
themselves are enlightened sorts, well aware that marijuana is
relatively harmless and that designating it a dangerous drug is
ignorant, self-defeating stupidity.

But us cool dudes are in a minority, they continue. The broad masses
have been blinded to truth by the blather of judges, the fatuities of
commentators and politicians, the laughable pronouncements of
solemn-faced police.

"The seizure of this small armful of marijuana plants will have saved
many lives..."

Forget about 50/50 recruitment. How can people who talk such tosh make
it through to the selection stage in the first place?

In 40 years of observing the phenomenon, the only effect I've noticed
of police seizures of marijuana has been an increase in prices on the
street.

Even now that the Home Office, normally a bastion of bone-headed
reaction, has downgraded marijuana to Class C status, fear grasps at
politicians when the legalisation issue is raised.

I am told that the panic of Sinn Fein leaders at the party's recent
ard fheis was something to behold when it briefly seemed possible
delegates would vote to adopt "Free the Weed" as a party slogan.

Mind you, at least Sinn Fein can discuss the issue. Suggest such a
sensible slogan to the DUP, say, and some of them would have to OD on
religion as an antidote.

There's a mystery here. How come so many people are personally in
favour of the legalisation of marijuana but convinced that it would be
disastrous to express this belief in politics?

A public opinion poll last month in two US states suggested an answer.
The poll focused on the limited question of whether marijuana should
be made available for medical reasons. But it uncovered an anomaly
which helps also to explain contradictory attitudes to marijuana generally.

The results of the poll, conducted in Vermont and Rhode Island, were
published on March 29.

Asked if they supported legal access to marijuana for seriously ill
patients, Vermont voted 71% yes; 21%; 8% had no firm opinion.

In Rhode Island, the figures were 69%; 26% and 5% respectively. So, a
commonsense response from a majority in both states.

But then the pollsters asked an additional question which I haven't
previously seen included in such surveys: "Regardless of your own
opinion, do you think the majority of people in (Vermont or Rhode
Island) support making marijuana medically available, or do you think
the majority opposes making marijuana medically available?"

The results were intriguing. In Vermont, 37% thought there would be
majority support; 37% believed only a minority would be in support,
25% were unsure.

The Rhode Island figures were even more dramatic: 27% thought there'd
be majority support; 60% thought not; 18% were uncertain.

Across the two states, a considerable proportion of the commonsense
majority believed it was in a minority.

This is strange. As a general rule, people tend to have an inflated
idea of how many of their fellow citizens support the things they
believe in themselves.

The only explanation I can think of is that the relentless promotion
of untruth about marijuana has so clouded the minds of ordinarily
intelligent people that even thinking on it makes them feel dizzy.

This reinforces my long-held belief that rational discussion of drugs
problems will continue to be impossible while marijuana remains
tainted by illegality.