DEBUNKING THE CASE FOR DECRIMINALIZATION

Decriminalization of marijuana is an issue currently at the forefront.

The pro-decriminalization camp makes comparisons with the destructive
nature of alcohol while claiming persecution for using marijuana. I agree
it is difficult to make a moral distinction between marijuana and alcohol.
Personally, the only moral distinction I see is that buying a little pot
for personal use supports an industry that directly creates crime in our
community. Of course, there are any number of purchases we make on a daily
basis where the profits are derived at the expense of the suffering of
others (buying products from nations that use child labour, for instance).

Beyond any ambiguously moral comparisons, a simple argument against
decriminalization would be to acknowledge that alcohol is a destructive
force in our society, so why add more intoxicants to the mix?

I have heard the pro-decriminalization camp make constant references to the
fact that people caught with a small amount of pot are labeled criminals;
this affects their ability to gain employment. They say this is unfair.

This is where I could not disagree more. If criminal records were
retroactively purged, this would be unfair to those who have made
responsible choices. Responsible choices based on respect for our society
and appreciation for the potential consequences.

For those who have made a poor choice, their mistake will not haunt them
for the rest of their lives. Criminal records can be cleared after the
required amount of time has elapsed and the behavior has not been repeated.
There will be a timeframe in which those with a criminal record will be
unable to compete for certain occupations. This is called a consequence.
Our world is not consequence-free.

Many of these "recreational" marijuana users are middle-class young people
with access to education opportunities I can only dream of as a member of
the working poor. With limited access to educational opportunities and the
highly coveted university degree, my responsible choices and constructive
behavior should work to my advantage. How is it fair that someone who
knowingly disregards the law has that forgiven in order to create more
opportunity?

Opportunity is scarce. If someone has made responsible choices, this should
be to their advantage.

Matthew Adam McDonnell, Regina