Causal Stories

There are several different stories that can be told when discussing changing the current marijuana laws.  One argument is that people should not use marijuana because it is against the law, its been like this a long time, there is obviously a reason the government decides to regulate it, and nothing can be done to change the frame politicians put around marijuana usage.  This is a great example of an "accidental" causal story, in which people believe that marijuana is illegal because that is just the way it is, and there is nothing that can be done about it.  I strongly disagrees with this view, because it should be an individuals choice.  Despite the fact it has been illegal since 1937, it doesn't have to stay that way, and there is lots that can be done to change the laws.  The best causal story that describes the current laws making marijuana illegal is the "intentional" causal story.  The government intended to make marijuana illegal, knowing that it would infringe on peoples civil rights, and people would be opposed to it.  The 1936 Propaganda film "Reefer Madness"was created in attempt to drive youth away from using marijuana.  People generally see marijuana through the first causal story mentioned (accidental), however I see the issue through the intentional causal view because the government has attempted to convince the polis that marijuana is not good for the collective in our society.  Regardless of the fact that they have placed a law on individual morality.

Marijuana Progression

The following piece of data is the result of a survey conducted by The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).  The people surveyed were from various regions of the United States and of different age, gender, political and ideological groups.  The question asked was, should the use of marijuana be legal?  The overall result was that 44% of U.S. adults believed marijuana indeed should be legal for use.  This tells a very different story from polls taken from the late 1970s to the mid-1900s in which only about 25% of the adult population was in favor of legalization of marijuana use.  Thus showing that peoples opinion on the issue has drastically changed over the years.  This ties to my policy because it is now apparent that the public views on the reform of marijuana laws is increasing.  If the current statistics continue on the same path it is very apparent that the public's support for reform will continue to grow.  With more public support for the reform only means one thing, which is marijuana laws are on the verge of change in the United States.  That is because the only way the government will support the cause is if its people back the policy issue and show growing support and favor for the laws to be changed.

Annual American Deaths From...

The image above is very controversial for many Americans. The picture shows annual American citizens deaths from various different categories of substances. The reason this would image would bring a debate among the public is because marijuana is listed as causing no deaths to citizens, yet it is illegal. Tobacco and alcohol on the other hand, according to the image, account for 500,000 annual deaths, despite the fact that they are legal. The main debate here is why is marijuana illegal? If various other legal substances cause an enormous amount of deaths but are permitted by law, then why does the government deem marijuana "harmful" to citizens and to our society?

Symbols

Marijuana stands for many things that depends on how the individual "sees" the "drug". Peoples perception of marijuana may depend on many different things, from personal use or, experimentation, to a synecdoche view. Synecdoches are figures of speech in which a part is used to represent the whole. Some of our society and our government as whole see marijuana as a "bad drug", that is both bad for individuals and and for the entire U.S. population (with the exceptions of certain states allowing medicinal use). The media helps to frame marijuana as a negative substance towards society, for example, that is a gateway drug that leads to the addiction to "hard drugs". However people are basing their opinions on facts that may very well be true in some cases, but as a whole are inaccurate. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, in 2007, 14.4 million Americans aged 12 or older used marijuana at least once in the month. However not ever individual of those 14.4 million people are addicted to other drugs. The government and media tend to take extreme examples of cases with marijuana users and blow them out of proportion to make the public bias towards marijuana. Yet when some state governments began to sink into debt, they were quick to turn towards the idea of marijuana as revenue, not as a "bad drug".

Free

By definition, all everyday U.S. citizens are "free" to use marijuana as they please, in the sense that they are no physical constraints stopping someone from using marijuana. However in reality people do not have the "freedom" to use marijuana, because of the negative repercussions by the government. “Freedom” would be citizens having the legal ability to use marijuana for recreational use, without fear of persecution, as long as they are “of age”. The polis model would best help to achieve “freedom “, because using marijuana is simply people perusing their own interests, and not harming anyone else in the process.

Security

Marijuana is used by most people as a desire, not a need.  However there are some people who do consider marijuana a need in their everyday life, not a biological need, but more of a need to feel more secure in their lives.  Some cancer patients claim that using marijuana reduces their physical and emotional pain, as well as the stress that is a result of chemotherapy, despite the fact the the FDA has found that there is no medical use for marijuana.  Marijuana is also used in cancer patients because though they may lose weight during chemotherapy, marijuana has a side effect that increases appetite.  I argue that the use of marijuana should not be limited to medicinal use (thirteen states have legalized medical marijuana use: AK, CA, CO, HI, ME, MI, MT, NV, NM, OR, RI, VT, and WA) but should be legal for recreational use as well.  The use of marijuana provides a alternative to people who, for example, don't like to drink alcohol.  People drink alcohol because the effect alcohol causes on the body makes people feel good, so why shouldn't people be able to use marijuana if it makes them feel good?  For some people using marijuana represents a more spiritual or artistic mood, rather then just a sense of entertainment.  For these people, using marijuana brings not quite the direct satisfaction that people who use it for fun experience, but it provides for artists by enabling what they are able to do because of using marijuana.

People feel secure when their basic needs are taken care of (in our case by the government).  A secure outcome for the reform of marijuana laws would be to legalize marijuana for recreational use, because people who use marijuana would feel secure by not having to worry about being penalized by the law for using marijuana.  People who use marijuana illegally should not have to fear the government, or fear how they are looked upon by the others, simply because they see using marijuana as a desire, or in some cases a need.  Security could best be achieved through the market, because reforming the marijuana laws would maximize self-interests.  Interests in which i believe the government has not right to put a barrier on.  If the government stands by their decision to keep marijuana illegal because society doesn't need it, then why don't they go ahead and bring back prohibition?

Efficiency

The most efficient way to reform the current marijuana laws would be to legalize the good for recreational use. The government would have to help to regulate the amount a person possesses and the age of the person possessing marijuana. I think that the government should allow a person, 18 years of age or older, to possess up to 3 oz of cannabis for recreational use, because no one has a legitimate reason to possess anymore than that at one time for personal use. However controlling these factors would be much easier and more efficient than spending tax payer’s money, as we currently are doing, to persecute people (overcrowding jails with nonviolent offenders) for breaking the current laws. In exchange the government, and the polis, would profit from the money gained through taxation of marijuana, and from the money saved by freeing our jails of people incarcerated for possession of marijuana charges. The input the government would have to exercise would be even more minimal than they are already exerting, and the output would heavily outweigh the input as it would help our economy that is in much need of funds. The cost to legalize marijuana for recreational use would cut back government income from current fines such as possession of marijuana fines, yet this aspect of cost would be canceled out by the judicial systems acquittal of people currently overcrowding jails due to marijuana charges. The benefit would outweigh the cost, and help the polis, because the funds saved by freeing up our jails could be used towards more important issues such as education.