Legalization of Marijuana 1

The United States has been dealing with drug policy since the 19th century where enforcement

or regulations did not exist, to the 20th century when the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) was

established to control the use, possession, distribution of drug, and within the last 40 years

marijuana has been an explicit issue. There are a few options that are considered when discussing

drug and they are: prohibition, decimalization, and legalization. Prohibition is a strict and

complete outlaw of a substance, making it illegal. Decriminalization is a partial outlaw of a

substance, making it illegal to distribute or carry over a certain amount of that substance, but not

illegal to use. Legalization is the complete acceptance of a substance, making it legal, but certain

aspects, such as age of use, advertisement, and distribution are controlled by the government. In

history there have been many decisions made for or against legalization of certain drugs, while

research and in depth examination played a major role in the decision to accept a drug as legal.

Legalization of marijuana is not a new topic in the U.S. drug policy, but it is a topic that has no

resolution in sight just yet. The major issues for the endorsement or opposition for legalization

stem from social acceptance and medical acceptance.

Social acceptance is the agreement of a society on a topic and a major factor in the legalization

of anything in our society. Many substances that were once utilized in society in one aspect or

another are now considered illegal in the United States due to social acceptance. Alain Joffe and

W. Samuel Yancey (2004) stated, “Use of morphine also was extensive, and heroin was marked

as a “sedative for coughs.” Cocaine, which routinely was added to paten medicine and

beverages, was also legal;” How did society as a whole determine that morphine is a legal

medicine and heroin should be illegal? Their personal experiences and results of nationwide

testing affected the decision making process. Many supporters of legalizing marijuana rely on

the fact that they have never experienced a violent person influenced by the high of marijuana,

Legalization of Marijuana 2

but have dealt with an angry alcoholic. But marijuana has been identified as a psychoactive drug

and could affect the mental behavior of a person, even though it would take a significant

exposure at one time. While many of the objectors claim that marijuana will just become a

parent drug, or a drug that will lead to stronger drugs. The high comes from the false sense of

pleasure, stated by Damon Linker (2001) “in a country that increasingly medicates itself with

pharmaceuticals, which, like pot, induce pleasure by manipulating chemicals already present in

the human body[…]” This is what leads to the addiction aspect of the drug; most worry that

someone will be addicted to that pleasure and look for the next substitution for that pleasure,

which will continue to burden society.

The medical acceptance of a drug is another significant factor in the legalization process. As

stated above by Alain Joffe and W. Samuel Yancey (2004), morphine experimentation allowed

that drug to be legalized for the medical purposes that it serves in society today. Ana Aura

(2011) stated “By 2005 eleven U.S. states had authorized marijuana smoking for the relief of

pain and discomfort or the control of nausea and weight loss when prescribed by a physician.”

While supporters to legalization point out that marijuana has the medical services needed for

some of the world’s worst diseases or illnesses and those who are suffering will benefit, it would

be selfish not to consider those unfortunate people. Those who have used marijuana include HIV

patients going through chemotherapy, AIDS patients with anorexia, glaucoma patients, and

multiple sclerosis patients. These individuals state that marijuana did provide relief for pain or

help deal with side effects of the illness. Then there are those who oppose the medical reasoning

to legalize marijuana. Majority of the objectors express that marijuana is not an answer to those

illnesses or diseases and will lead to an increase of false diagnosis, for those trying to abuse the

system. John P. Walters (2004) states “The FDA has also expressed concerns that marijuana use

Legalization of Marijuana 3

may worsen the condition of those to who it is prescribed.” Yet there have been many patients

who use this drug illegally, supported by William E. Stempey (1998) “allowed individual

patients to buy and use drugs not yet approved but under investigation, arguing that terminally ill

patients, have nothing to lose and should not be deprived of hope.”

The legalization of marijuana is not a frivolous topic and should be taken seriously by all U.S.

citizens, who should not support legalization or decriminalization. While there are some benefits

to marijuana, such as the use by cancer or HIV patients can help with pain relief or appetite. It is

not a complete answer to these illnesses and will cause problems with drug enforcement, more

laws will be needed for regulation, or the significant increase in false allegations of illnesses will

overwhelm the medical industry. Do the benefits really out-weigh the consequences? Also

consider the set back to the war on drugs that the United States have been fighting for many

years with many different substances. I do not think our nation will ever be ready to legalize a

drug as potentially potent as marijuana. As a society we still need to mature and conduct proper

research on the long term effects that maybe experienced from patients and our adolecents.

Legalization of Marijuana 4

References

Alain Joffe and W. Samuel Yancey (2004). Legalization of Marijuana: Potential Impact on

Youth, Pediatrics Volume 113, Pages e632-e638. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&hid=7&sid=f509e564-165a-

4006-880d-f9c9a43a4b71%40sessionmgr13.

Ana Aura (2011). Juridical Current, Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages 13-22. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&hid=107&sid=c9e9b862-6423-

44bd-af5c-37d7da52b2ce%40sessionmgr114.

Damon Linker (2001). First thing: A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life, Issue 17, Page

6-7. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=6&hid=7&sid=6e45fdfa-

0dc2-4163-a32d fd3188b95db7%40sessionmgr11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%

3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=9710032650

John P. Walters (2004). National Review, Volume 56, Issue 18, Pages 41-42. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=6&hid=7&sid=4585c4ad-dc37-473f-bd0b-

6e264acfb401%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d

%3d#db=a9h&AN=1410546.

William E. Stempey (1998). America, Volume 178, Issue 12, Page 14-16. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=6e45fdfa-0dc2-4163-a32d

fd3188b95db7%40sessionmgr11&vid=14&hid=17.