The Process of Decriminalisation of Marijuana - Essay Example

Insert Introduction Different countries and s have different legal standpoints on the possession and use of cannabis sativa, commonly known as marijuana. In some countries or states, there is a total ban on the recreational use and possession of marijuana while in others, prohibition is made on quantity. In most states and countries such as Israel, the United States, Canada and the Czech Republic, the medicinal use of marijuana is legal. While the process of decriminalisation of marijuana began in Colorado, in 2013 in the US, the process has not taken a definitive shape in the United Kingdom. In the United Kingdom, there is a push to have marijuana as Class B drug, legalised. Conversely, there are others such as Steve Rolles who are arguing that Marijuana can be legalised without experiencing the drawbacks that would accompany that move, if the UK marijuana market is regulated with an aid of strict and feasible framework. Steve Rolles is the Transformation Drug Policy Foundation’s Senior Policy Analyst. However, presently, the UK law stands as an impediment to Rolles’ postulation, given that the law criminalises recreational use and possession of marijuana. It is for this reason that many cafes selling marijuana are open, run clandestinely and immediately closed. Indications that the United Kingdom, particularly Britain may review its legal stand on marijuana is underscored by the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg stating in February that the UK would explore viable alternatives to the wholesale proscription of drugs and that Britain was going to be the centre of the debate. Reasons for the Legalisation of Marijuana There is a myriad of reasons being bandied as the reason for the legalisation of marijuana. First of all, there are those who argue that the legalisation of marijuana would help Britain save billions and this would therefore an economic value to the United Kingdom. Behind this argument is the rationale that decriminalising cannabis sativa will open up many marijuana-related businesses. These businesses would make profits which in turn would be taxable by the federal government. The rationale of this argument is upheld by the fact that the state of Colorado announced in March that it had collected more than one million pounds in taxes. This tax revenue was obtained by taxing marijuana businesses that were newly legalised and sold the drug for recreational purposes. According to Danovitch, political expedience also informs the push for the legislation of cannabis sativa. Legalisation of bhang has become a strong issue in Western Australia’s Senate elections after political experts noticed and communicated the Help End Marijuana Prohibition’s (HEMP) high chances for success among minor party alliance. This state of affairs has been partly fuelled by the growing popularity of cannabis law reforms in Australia. It is against this backdrop that Jim Moylan, HEMP’s chief WA aspirant, accused the Greens of taking votes away from the HEMPs by making people believe that they were pro cannabis law reforms, while it is true that Section 8 of the Green’s federal policy does not in any way support the legalisation of presently illegal drugs (Danovitch, 91). In another wavelength, there are those who are convinced that legalising marijuana is likely to disassociate the society from drug-related or narcotics-related crimes. Particularly, CLEAR members such as George Hutchings, Keith Vaz MP, Dean Price and Peter Reynolds are categorical that legally decriminalising marijuana is bound to rid the recreational consumption and supply of drugs of covert elements and behaviours. More specifically, drug dealers and peddlers only exist in the streets because recreational drugs such as cannabis sativa are legally proscribed. Similarly, with drug peddling also come crime-related acts such as street homicide, gang violence, robbery and even criminal profiling and set-ups of the innocent by the police. There are those who are also convinced that legalising marijuana is likely to disassociate it from the dangerous elements that accompany drug abuse and substance reliance. Clements and Daryal in this case divulge that people always take an overdose of recreational drugs because of the clandestine nature which characterise the way the drugs are reared, supplied and consumed. Because marijuana is illegal, planting and rearing marijuana plants are done secretly as a way of deluding detection by law enforcement officers. Marijuana is therefore grown in hazardous places, resultantly. Again, the means of supplying marijuana is done in an environment that is neither hygienic, nor conducive. Likewise, clients have to visit dark alleys and crime-prone neighbourhoods and thereby exposing them to crime and conscription into a life of crime (Clements and Daryal, 101, 103-4). Conversely, the foregoing can easily be corrected by amending the law to legalise marijuana. This is to the effect that legalising marijuana will pave way for regulating the environment in which marijuana can be planted, reared, supplied and sold. This means that hygienic and safety standards will be being adhered to as far as planting, nurturing, supplying and selling marijuana go. At the same time, it will be easier for those who dabble in marijuana to be insulated from cases of drug overdose. This is because it will be easier for the government to research, establish and communicate findings on the extent to which someone can take marijuana without overdosing. Reasons against the Legalisation of Marijuana Despite the several reasons being touted as the need for the legalisation of marijuana, there are serious drawbacks that may accompany the proposed legislative development. For one, it is important to appreciate the fact that marijuana is one of the psychoactive substances. With the legalisation of marijuana, it is given that there will be rising cases of the use of marijuana for recreational and emotional catharsis. It is important that people appreciate the fact that coping with life’s inevitable disappointments, sadness and setbacks is part of emotional growth and maturity. When people begin to turn to cannabis sativa to sublimate or abate emotional stress, the country is going to have a population that is: unable to process, control, express and understand its emotions; anxious and nearly without remedy; and unable to relate with others well, unwell it is high on marijuana. It is not certain how a country will deal with a population that is always seeking newer and less conventional ways of doing self-medication and with marijuana always at its disposal. Again, as a psychoactive substance, it remains to be seen, how a people who have legalised marijuana will cope with high cases of mental complications. In light of the immediately above statement, it is expedient that people are not deceived with fallacies that marijuana is a naturally occurring herb which has never exhibited harm to any user. On the contrary, scientific research findings are clear that regular abuse of marijuana comes with heavy psychosocial consequences. As a psychoactive drug, marijuana interacts with brain chemicals such as neurotransmitter dopamine, and thereby causing brain functions to be altered. It is the alteration of the neurotransmitter dopamine that will for instance cause addiction. Addicts who may attempt to withdraw from the use of marijuana may therefore experience withdrawal symptoms and syndrome. Withdrawal syndrome may in turn cause low energy, fatigue, anxiety and serious depression (Committee on Substance Abuse and Committee on Adolescence, 1825-6). Still, people who use marijuana have difficulty in maintaining self-discipline which is vital for important undertakings such as medical appointments, consistent following of the doctor’s prescriptions, hygiene and a culture of reading or hard work. These developments may undermine the marijuana user’s psychosocial development, academic and intellectual progress, general health and financial distress. To underscore this, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) observed that 10% of regular marijuana users are more susceptible to dependency syndrome, given that a large number of marijuana users always later seek for professional intervention. In 2012 alone, 957,000 people from the age of 12 and above sought professional help for marijuana treatment. More interestingly, this is at least one year before the legalisation of marijuana in Colorado and Washington D.C. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), marijuana features in Schedule I drugs. This means that marijuana’s peers are heroin and LSD which are both dangerous (Fink, 63 and Roffman, 50). It is important to factor cases where legalisation of marijuana has been brought into effect to confirm the supposed gains of the move. Although Amsterdam is a perfect candidate for this consideration since it was the first body politic to legalise marijuana and is the most renowned tourist destination for marijuana users, yet a keen look at its socioeconomic dynamics reveals that the reasons being touted for the legalisation of marijuana are not tenable. In Amsterdam, there are concerns that children are getting increasingly soaked in drugs including marijuana use and that contrary to the claims that the legalisation of the drug will alleviate crime, there is a significant rise in crime, especially around coffee shops where marijuana is sold. The physical consequences of the drug cannot also be gainsaid. Marijuana smoke is proven to be more toxic to the lungs than cigarette smoke. For this, regular marijuana smokers suffer more devastating lung complications at least 20 years earlier than tobacco smokers. These, among an array of many other reasons inform the need not to legalise marijuana. Works Cited Clements, W. Kenneth and Daryal, Mert. “Exogenous shocks and related goods: Drinking and the legalisation of marijuana.” Economics Letters, 89.1 (2005): 101 – 106. Print Committee on Substance Abuse and Committee on Adolescence. “Legalization of Marijuana: Potential Impact on Youth.” Pediatrics, 113.6 (2004): 1825 – 1826. Print Danovitch, Itai. “Sorting through the science on marijuana: facts, fallacies, and implications for legalization. (The Road to Legitimizing Marijuana: What Benefit at What Price?)” McGeorge Law Review, 43.1 (2012): 91. Print Fink, Joseph L., III. “Legalization of marijuana use.” Pharmacy Times, 79.3 (2013): 63. Print Roffman, Roger A. “Legalization of marijuana: unraveling quandaries for the addiction professional.” Frontiers in Psychiatry, 4.2 (2013): 50. Print Read More