LEGALIZING MARIJUANA WILL SPUR WIDE-SCALE BENEFITS

"The smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health. It
would be reasonable to judge cannabis as less of a threat than alcohol or
tobacco."

- - Lancet, British Medical journal, 11/14/98

For those of you who didn't tune in last week, not much was missed. I spent
the first half of the column being angry and the second half laying down a
rather fetid, statistically-heavy rant from which little light escaped. But
not this time, kids.

Last week I focused mainly on marijuana as it relates to law enforcement
agencies. This first point revolves mainly around the belief that cops have
better things to do than harass and arrest citizens who choose to partake
in a drug that, if nothing else, generally prohibits its user from
committing any violent crime. Honestly, go take a few bong hits and tell me
if you're up for knocking off a liquor store or stealing a car. Then
explain to me why law enforcement personnel are made to come after you
while hundreds of other people at that moment are, in fact, knocking off
liquor stores and stealing cars.

Moving on, let's tackle the harms that arise from marijuana prohibition.
Users are forced into a clandestine market that raises not only the price
of the drug, but the likelihood that someone will incur bodily harm
somewhere during the transportation, distribution, sale, or usage that all
illegal drugs follow. Right now, some twitchy shotgun-toting guy in eastern
Kentucky is waiting for a DEA agent to round the corner and charge into his
field, gun drawn and torch lit. Bang. You're dead. For what; is there any
good reason why a plant - a weed - should facilitate violence?

Back in the 1920s, marijuana use was associated almost exclusively with
African-Americans and Hispanics. For all non-history buffs, those weren't
the most popular demographics of the time. In response to growing
recreational use of the drug, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics began issuing
news bulletins claiming that a marijuana user "becomes a fiend with savage
or 'cave man' tendencies. His sex desires are aroused and some of the most
horrible crimes result. He hears light and sees sound. To get away from it,
he suddenly becomes violent and may kill."

Even the Washington Times editorialized that "the fatal marihuana cigarette
must be recognized as a deadly drug and American children must be protected
against it." Not that the federal government, in an effort to misinform and
manipulate the populous, would ever exert control over the media. Sorry, I
need a moment here. I never thought I could write a sentence that would
actually make me vomit on the keyboard.

Long story short, in two hearings totaling about one hour, Congress
condemned marijuana use as a criminal act. Not long thereafter, the Ways
and Means Committee submitted the "Marihuana Tax Act." After a striking
90-second debate in the House and Senate, Roosevelt signed the act into law
in 1937. The lone visible dissenter to this initiative was the American
Medical Association, which stated, "There is no evidence" to suggest that
marijuana use is dangerous. What do they know, anyway?

Yes, this is the BS that led to the formation of marijuana prohibition: a
massive government-waged campaign meant to widen the social, economic, and
cultural gap between whites and then-minorities. The sick part is, this
crap has worked like a charm.

The Drug Reform Coordination Network reports that "on any given day, more
than one out of every three black males between ages 18-29 are either
incarcerated, on probation, on parole, or under warrant for arrest."
Latinos? One in six. Whites? One in twenty. Drug-related charges constitute
the largest annual grouping of "criminal" activity. Way to go, you Nazis.

That's it. When it was written, the law had nothing to do with the chemical
nature of the drug or its physical effect on people. Still doesn't. Does
anyone doubt that the continuance of this prohibition is indicative of
anything other than the government's desire to appear "tough on crime"
while reminding its citizens who is in charge and ensuring this atavistic
propagation of racially-influenced legislature?

Ok, I'll back off a little. One of the most widely-shouted claims about
marijuana is its characterization as a "gateway" drug. If marijuana is
legalized, then what's next? We can't just start letting our citizens do
whatever they want, can we? Surely your average country bumpkin isn't
intellectually fit or well enough informed to make decisions about his/her
health.

While picking around www.norml.org, I found a few interesting factoids. In
1981, the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research said that
"Decriminalization has virtually no effect on either marijuana use or
beliefs and related attitudes about marijuana among American youth where
such policies have been enacted." The 2000 Public Health Policy stated that
"those living under decriminalization laws consume as much or less
marijuana than those living where possession remains a criminal offense."

How is it that the public knows and accepts this, but the Fed doesn't?
Granted, they're busy bombing anybody with brown skin back to the stone
age. But couldn't they take a few minutes to look over these figures?
Virtually every study ­ either independent or federally-commissioned ­ has
shown that legalizing marijuana would ease the strain on law enforcement
agencies, slash prison populations, free up billions of dollars in tax
revenue, and even allow citizens to make healthy, informed decisions on
their physical well-being.

One last thing that really irks me is the money to be made in all of this.
Let's say the average semi-daily pot smoker spends $40 every week on weed.
That's over $2000 per person each year that isn't accounted for come tax
time. Now, three percent of the adult population admittedly smokes
marijuana habitually. You do the math. Alan Greenspan has and I doubt he's
happy. That said, what about the big tobacco companies? Philip Morris has
been bankrolling politicians for decades. You know they've got contingency
plans. In the event of legalization, they'd chop half their fields and
start dancing like Johnny Weedseed all the way to the bank. It's a win-win
situation. All parties involved, from the pot smoker to the economy to the
politicians to big business, would benefit. Do the old rich white guys who
run our country really hate black people and freedom this much?

Ah, this whole business just leaves me irritated and disheartened. All the
rhetoric and statistical evidence in the world doesn't seem to do a lick of
good. Our scientists, doctors, civic leaders, honest politicians, and
general population have made a decision that, to this point, has been
either ignored or shat on by the federal government. For now, we can only
hope that one day soon, the worm will have turned, our country will have
grown up a bit, and our national leaders will be ready to take the next
logical step.

Sean Mintus is a senior professional and creative writing major. After he
finishes this joint, he's going to go rape a few nuns and shoot some
schoolchildren.