AMA came out clear to resolve the misunderstanding on marijuana – on the drug not being of the same level as opium and cocaine (US Weapon 1). US Weapon continues to argue that by 1969, the Marijuana Tax Act had been declared unconstitutional and the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 had been passed (1). At the time President Nixon – according to Gerber – and later Reagan were on a war against drugs; thus, possession of marijuana had immense penalties on the dealers (US Weapon 1). From the above, it is warranted to argue that banning of marijuana was not based on facts but on assumptions and claims grounded on the benefits of certain personalities in the country. Uses of marijuana Bello argues that a lot of symptoms can be treated using marijuana, for instance, during chemotherapy. Bello also notes that marijuana is useful for reducing nausea and vomiting, improving sleep, appetite and relieving pain. Case for Legalizing Marijuana I am of the view that marijuana needs to be legally recognized in the US. This argument is derived from an evaluation of the assumptions that outlawing of marijuana is simply a false fact. In the words of Gerber, arguing that marijuana is a major cause of cancer is purely invented. This is for the reason that tobacco smokers consume lots of cigarettes in a day as contrasted with the marijuana smokers. It is an obvious assumption that no individual smokes the same amounts of marijuana as an individual who smokes tobacco. Moreover, Goldstein indicates that salt and some dairy products are cancerous yet they are consumed.
Fox, Tvert, and Armentano are of the opinion that though marijuana consists of lots of chemicals, the same applies for drugs such as coffee. (64). An evaluation of the number of chemicals in marijuana does not confirm that marijuana is lethal. In this case, Morgan indicates that marijuana has been perceived noxious, yet the statistics are wholly deceptive (9). In the opinion of Goldstein, marijuana is indicated to be a gate pass to harder drugs (120). Goldstein continues to argue that over 75% of people who use marijuana do not indulge in other hard drugs (119). Going by the ordinary view point, the leeway to drugs would debatably be indicated to be alcohol, or any form of wine. In this case, the government must change its focus and find other reasons for prohibiting marijuana. On the same line, the argument that marijuana is addictive is not logical as far as medical conclusions are concerned (Morgan 9). Caffeine is said to be more addictive as seen in the work of Fox, Tvert, and Armentano; thus, the government must attempt to change the belief that marijuana is addictive and should not be legalized (64). Other anti-marijuana scholars and personalities are of the view that marijuana impairs the learning ability of people. US Weapon argues that the government indicated that only heavy use of marijuana may impair learning (1). This is to mean that the allegations are not certain and are mere assumptions lacking inductive interpretations and analysis (Husak 158). From the research conducted by US Weapon, it is clear that effects on marijuana were minimal on learners. Marijuana also does not hinder long-term memory, and the causal marijuana smokers were barely affected as opposed to the alcohol users