Decriminalization of Marijuana and Key Findings
Decriminalization of marijuana is a controversial topic and movement for removal of criminal penalties for possession of this drug started few decades ago. In the 1970s, this movement gained momentum as 11 states reduced penalties associated with possession of marijuana in small amount but nothing significant came out of this drive. While the public opinion remained sharply divided on the issue of decriminalization, this movement helped open a new window through which policy makers could see the other side of criminalization debate. Over the years, this debate has gained prominence as more and more Americans began advocating decriminalization of marijuana. According to Nadelmann (2004): "Seventy-two percent say that for simple marijuana possession, people should not be incarcerated but fined: the generally accepted definition of "decriminalization."...Support for broader legalization ranges between 25 and 42 percent, depending on how one asks the question. Two of every five Americans--according to a 2003 Zogby poll--say "the government should treat marijuana more or less the same way it treats alcohol: It should regulate it, control it, tax it, and only make it illegal for children." Close to 100 million Americans--including
6.In addition to the above, study conducted by the RAND institute shows that various industrialists exploit the capabilities of the prisoners held for drug abuse by making them work day in and day out and paying them minimum possible thereby compelling the remaining population to vie with this low-paid population. (Nordberg, 2000) Decriminalization debate is gradually shifting in favor of legalization. This is clear from various studies and surveys that indicate that marijuana possession is no longer seen as a social threat. People are beginning to accept the medical properties of this drug and are gradually opening up to the idea of decriminalization of marijuana if possessed in small amounts. The arguments in favor of legalization also include over-crowded prisons and alcohol-use being legal. Some of the key findings in this matter are: 5.Furthermore, a comprehensive and exhaustive study of the British drug policy, based on two years of extensive research, proves that "alcohol and tobacco are highly addictive and kill massive numbers of people, while neither of these effects have been demonstrated in marijuana use" (Nordberg, 2000) However legalization doesn't follow that the drug must be available for causal use and consumption. It means that while the supply should be regulated, it must be a banned substance so those who possess it are immediately sent to prison and people can benefit from its medical powers. "Legalization should not be taken to mean a lawless free-for-all with no restraint on the supply or use of the drug. Done properly it would allow government to take control of the distribution and quality of the substance away from criminals." (Brown) Harry Anslinger, Commissioner of the US Bureau of Narcotics, says, "How many murders, suicides, robberies, criminal assaults, holdups, burglaries and deeds of maniacal insanity it causes each year, especially among the young, can only be conjectured... No one knows, when he places a marijuana cigarette to his lips, whether he will become a joyous reveler in a musical heaven, a mad insensate, a calm philos
Some common words found in the essay are:
Shafer Commission, Brown Decriminalization, According Nadelmann, Ethan Nadelmann, , Bureau Narcotics, Cannabis Despite, nordberg 2000, decriminalization marijuana, medical properties, population nordberg 2000, marijuana dangerous drug, overcrowding prisons, extensive research, mcdonough 2000, dangerous drug, marijuana dangerous, marijuana possession, smoking marijuana,
Approximate Word count = 1404
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
