Reform of Marijuana Website

CLICK HERE

Rights

Freedom of expression is a right that relates to the legalization of marijuana.  Smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol are ways some people express their emotions in life today.  Although this example is privilege, people associate using theses substances as a right that they have.  People who use marijuana deserve this “right” as well as people who use other harmful substances.  Using marijuana correlates to the first amendment as does alcohol and tobacco.  However not everyone agrees that this is a right people should have.  The government is obviously a group of people who disagree that using marijuana should be a right.  Government expresses their feelings about marijuana by enforcing the laws put into place which punish people who use and possess the substance.   

Facts

The idea I hold on the reform of marijuana laws in not nesceciarly a fact.  The notion that I believe marijuana should be legal for medicinal use in not factual because it is not believed and understood by everyone to be true.  A fact that I do pose to you is that marijuana is just as bad for the brain and organs as alcohol and tobacco.  According to the "experts", the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, "Alcohol–damaged liver cells allow excess amounts of these harmful byproducts to enter the brain, thus harming brain cells".  Marijuana harms the body as well in various other ways.  According to a scholarly article done by Janet Joy and Allison Mack, "Although free of nicotine, marijuana smoke certainly pollutes the lungs. And since tobacco smoking has been linked to respiratory injury, cancer, emphysema, heart disease, complications of pregnancy, low birth weight, and other ills, it makes sense to worry whether smoking marijuana might prove equally harmful". I know these statements to be true simply because I'm taking into consderation the experts findings on the effects of marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco.  Though its not a fact that marijuana should be legal, it is factual to believe that the legal substances alcohol and tobacco are bad for the body, as is the illegal substance marijuana.  If the effects on the body are all harmful, why not treat laws reguarding the use of these substances the same?  Or perhaps, why not make the use of tobacco and alcohol illegal as well? 

Mack, Alison; Joy, Janet. Marijuana As Medicine : The Science Beyond the Controversy.
Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2000. p 53.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/clunet/Doc?id=10038627&ppg=53
Copyright © 2000. National Academies Press. All rights reserved.

Rules

The rules or laws, that are currently on marijuana make it illegal to possess any amount of marijuana unless you have a medical marijuana license.  As mentioned, the laws governing the use of marijuana are bed rules for the American people.  The laws infringe on civil liberties of citizens who use marijuana in recreation without negative effects on others.  However the goal of this rule is to keep people from using marijuana at all.  In effect these rules may actually want to make people use marijuana even more, as some find it a thrill to break the laws.  even without this factor, the laws are not good deterrents to keep people from using marijuana.  The rules can be improved by being reformed.  Thus allowing people to use marijuana recreationaly in a home environment or where it is deemed socially acceptable.  The substance can be regulated, like alcohol, by a Government agency which will maintain order in keeping the substance within a new rules system. 

Tools

Our current laws regarding the use of marijuana involves sanctions for people who use marijuana illegally (without a medical marijuana license).  For many years it has been clear to the American people that if you use marijuana illegally, and are detected  by a law enforcement officer of a kind, that you will have negative consequences (fines, probation, jail).  Inducements would solve many problems regarding the recreational use of marijuana.  By inducing such behavior all citizens could gain from the use of marijuana.  I'm not inferring that marijuana users are the ones necessarily being rewarded for using marijuana, though we can't forget exercising civil liberties, but as previously mentioned everyone would benefit from the taxes that would be levied on the good.  This brings me to my idea that regulatory tools would best suit my policy issue.
We are already spending way too much taxpayer money regulating the use of marijuana, so regulating the legal use of marijuana would cut back on these costs.  However you may ask yourself, what would be the conflict of legalizing marijuana?  The answer is people would be only be causing harm to themselves (as if alcohol doesn't cause harm to oneself?) not to mention that we are currently causing harm on every American citizen who has the burden of paying for sanctions against marijuana users.  By regulating the recreational use of marijuana, both groups would benefit from the results.

Targets

The targets for the reform of marijuana laws are not only marijuana users but everyone in the United States. The targets can be constructed into two groups; marijuana users, and people who don't use marijuana. Both of these groups would drastically be affected by a policy change in the current marijuana laws. My reasoning is quite simple, people who use marijuana would no longer fear negative repercussions from using the substance and will win back an important civil liberty. People who don't use marijuana would benefit from taxes paid by marijuana users. However this can only be achieved by a collective effort from both groups, or targets, that my policy is aimed towards. Yet one problematic factor is the idea of people using their "local knowledge", or what their individual communities think of the specific policy issue.

In Southern California it seem that peoples "local knowledge" towards marijuana and the reform of the current laws is more accepting than other parts of the nation. If it were up to the public, for example in Venice, California, the "local knowledge" of peoples view on marijuana would most likely cause the residents to favor or propose policies that would favor the reform of marijuana laws. However where I'm from, Wimberley, Texas, people who use their "local knowledge" in determining policy issues with marijuana would most likely be opposed to a change in our current marijuana laws. Its all a matter of what is deemed acceptable in each community, or region. California being a Democratic state with many liberals, and Texas a Republican state with many conservatives. Although I'm not suggesting that all liberals are for the legalization of marijuana and all conservatives opposed. So with this factor could the targets be changed from marijuana users and people who don't use marijuana to target groups of liberals and conservatives, or perhaps Democrats and Republicans?

Slideshow on Reform of Marijuana Laws