Sunday, November 4, 2007
Friday, November 2, 2007
After delving into the issue of legalizing marijuana, many things have been realized in the process of my work. Since I have been using mainly internet sources, the credibility of my sources has been a focus of mine. When dealing with an issue as marijuana, the perception given is that the topic is not serious. Therefore you find sites that are not backed by credible information, and even if they are well supported academic sites they can still be viewed as not credible. I have realized that the only sites you can use for medical marijuana that have merit are strictly medical sites like the AMA. By using these credible sources, your blog becomes significantly more revered which makes you look more like this rather than this.
When people argue, they want to make the issue into two sides. I’ve realized that there are many shades of gray in argumentation and the only way to use arguments like these are to acknowledge the other sides. One significant point that has shades of gray when talking about legalizing marijuana is the effects of legalization on crime deterrence. Since an argumentative point like crime deterrence has can only be projected since nothing like legalization has ever happened, studies will show that it won’t have a significant impact on legalization while some will argue that legalization will set poor model for the youth of America thus increasing crime. Very few times in argumentation are there clear cut sides, so you have to stay consistent with your argument.
My stance on legalizing marijuana has not changed, but the six-lane highway that I was once on has turned into a two lane road. By that I mean before starting this blog, I was blindly set on legalizing marijuana. After studying more in depth on medical marijuana, I have focused my opinion strictly on legalizing marijuana for those patients recommended medical use. This blog has forced me to become more focused in my arguments and stances and in this case going from a wide stance of total legalization to a regulatory stance for medical marijuana.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
If you wish to focus more on the medicinal uses of marijuana in more detail then there are many sites to do that. The American Medical Association( AMA) gives information regarding the health aspects, diseases with which marijuana can be used as treatment, as well as information regarding pharmaceutical drugs made with marijuana.
The criminal aspects of legalizing marijuana are often spoken about when legalization is talked about. Crime deterrence and money spent on enforcing marijuana laws are topics which pro legalization supporters harp upon because of the efficiency that legalization could cause in our police systems. Those not supporting legalization will cite that it will lead to other drugs as well as set a poor model for the youth of America, both causing crime to increase. You as the reader must take this information and decide for yourself whether legalizing marijuana, specifically medical marijuana, is good for the country. I can only show you the way through these websites; you have to take that step
Sunday, October 28, 2007
I really appreciate those that read my blog. If you like my blog , you will be interested in or at least appreciate the following blogs.
This blog expresses another viewpoint on the legalization of marijuana. The writer who is also in favor of legalization of marijuana is interested in the medicinal purposes of marijuana like me. However, she focuses on the drugs that can be made from marijuana and then used medicinally. Her blog is worth visiting to see the other side of medical marijuana. I think that less focus should be on the regulation of marijuana if it was legalized for medicinal use where she thinks that marijuana should be regulated to the point where only drugs made from marijuana should be legalized. Not only does she provide an objective view, but it’s backed by quality sources with a visually appealing layout for an enjoyable blog experience.
This blog focuses on the separation of church and state which is an interesting argument that can be related to marijuana laws being influenced by a conservative religious influenced governing body. The writer says that it’s time to accept that our country was built on religious values and influences, but that our country is not regulated and defined by one set of values. The writer does an excellent job of diffusing the situation which can be a heated argument because many still believe that through prayer in school , etc. , our country is still regulated by religious values.
Alcohol101’s blog focuses on lowering the drinking age to 18. This blog is worth visiting to see how deep an argument can be defined. He has stated that if the drinking age was lowered to 18 that certain regulations would have to come with it, mainly an increase in penalties for drunk drivers. He analyzes the issue on many different levels, He states broadly first that the drinking age should be lowered. He then follows up with saying that the 21 year old drinking age is limiting Americans rights and that this is wrong. He concludes by saying safety is the most important thing and that an increase in penalties for drunk driving and a lowering of the drinking age will accomplish the previous arguments of not letting the government limit our freedoms and keeping safety a priority.
Friday, October 26, 2007
The movement for the legalization of medical marijuana is constantly growing and won’t hit its zenith until it is actually legalized. The medical marijuana debate hinges on whether more marijuana medicines for AIDS and cancer patients can be studied and developed. Legislators will be forced to act if more studies on the positive effects of marijuana on AIDS or cancers are published. The first probable step for legalization would be to legalize marijuana for patients who have doctor’s recommendation only. This restriction could eventually be loosened to the point where marijuana is sold in pharmacies to people that are 21 and older in a similar fashion as tobacco and alcohol are.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Monday, October 22, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Legalizing marijuana is a topic with many few shades of gray because people in America are not only pro-legalization or pro-drug enforcement but can view legalization in a couple ways. The two main avenues that this argument walks is first whether it should be decriminalized and if it is decriminalized then should it be legalized in America. Legalization makes Americans who consider it question many aspects of their life like religion, morals, and family while considering the bigger picture of government, freedoms and medicine.
As history has shown, the American government has approached legalization of marijuana first by considering decriminalizing it. In 1972, The National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse acknowledged that there could be problems with continued use of marijuana, but insisted that decriminalization was the best option. Oregon decriminalized marijuana in 1973. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter stated that," Congress should immediately move towards decriminalization."Even as recent as 2005, the city of Denver has decriminalized up to and ounce of marijuana for personal use. The evidence that decriminalization is possible is all publicized and well documented.
Even though decriminalization has been brought to light, most in favor want to take a step forward towards legalization. People in favor or legalization of marijuana cite many positives that could stem from it. If marijuana was taxed and regulated like alcohol, it would produce savings and tax revenues between 10 and $14 billion. The money spent by police enforcement could be allocated to more serious crimes. Also, since 90% of marijuana related arrests are of users, you could save more money by not having to house users in prisons. Prohibition of marijuana does not lead to deterrence of its use which is an argument that is highly publicized by the DPNA. Thus if money spent on deterrence from enforcement or education was reallocated towards other areas of police or governing, the government would be using its money more efficiently.
Marijuana legalization would also make it easier to obtain marijuana for those who use it medicinally. Marijuana has been said by the American Medical Marijuana Association as well as the American Medical Association that its medicinal purposes are undeniable particularly for muscular disorders and glaucoma. Right now, medical marijuana is hindered by federal laws that conflict with state laws as in California which allow for the use of medical marijuana.
Those in favor of legalization often state that prohibition is limiting their rights as Americans to freedom of expression. America was founded on the freedoms that Americans enjoy and by prohibiting an action that more than 10 million Americans practice, the government is destroying those ideals. Also, they see marijuana in a similar situation that alcohol was in the earlier 1900s when prohibition limited the rights to alcohol. Marijuana is a less addictive drug and less harmful than alcohol and yet it is still legalized and marijuana is not.
When the other side of legalization, a pro-drug enforcement and anti-legalization stance, is presented, religion, morality, and the future of Americans are the issues that are questioned. Those not in favor of legalization cite that their faith leads them to stray from marijuana which has negative connotation associated with it as well as being likened to the devil. Also, many religions are against intoxication of any kind which comes with marijuana. They also support the studies that show marijuana as a gateway drug which is related to the future of children in America. Many studies say that children ages 12-17 are incredibly likely to try other drugs that are considered more dangerous like cocaine and heroine.
Another argument that is associated with legalization is the morality of marijuana. The message America would be sending children by allowing the sale of a substance that was once banned shows large contradiction. There is a huge negative stigma associated with marijuana and government propaganda like by presidents and congress has made marijuana a low point on the scale of morality. Legalizing marijuana is an anti-establishment type of movement and Americans are slow to change.
When summing up pro legalization and anti legalization sides, other questions, doubts, and thoughts come to mind. For instance, when arguing a religious backing for either side, should religion affect drug policies made by the federal government? This seems to be a conflict of the church and state division which is one of the major issues that was addressed when America was founded. Another idea that could cause friction is whose set of morals should the government stand by. Since the country is generally divided down the middle politically and are affected regionally by externalities like money, religion, and ethnicity, who is to say what morals should be a standard for America. The thought by most pro legalization supporters is that if legalized, at least people are given a chance to choose whether they embrace marijuana instead of the current situation where there is no chance to accept marijuana because of the laws against it.
Legalization of marijuana is a hotbed topic among Americans today. Whether America leans towards pro-legalization or anti-legalization, a consensus will never be drawn on issues related to morality, religion, medicinal use, or crime deterrence.