COLUMN: Consistent marijuana policy

From Davina Figeroux's, "Say It Ain't So," Fall '97 From Davina Figeroux's, "Say It Ain't So," Fall '97 Recently, California approved marijuana use for medicinal purposes. The comments leading up to the passing of Proposition 215 sparked another round of a nation-wide debate. Why is marijuana illegal, and should it continue to be? In any event, even if marijuana was found to do serious damage to society, why not treat it the same as alcohol and tobacco products? Hundreds of thousands of deaths each year can be attributed to tobacco use. Americans consume more alcohol than they do milk. And, alcohol also leads to many hospitalizations, deaths and countless cases of vehicular homicide involving drunk drivers. Yet all this is okay. There's no war on alcohol. There's no war on tobacco. But instead, marijuana remains prohibited even though it accounts for zero deaths each year. The U.S. has adopted an illogical policy. There is little regulation on certain substances and total prohibition of others while recognizing the dangers (or supposed dangers) of each. If alcohol, tobacco and marijuana were treated identically, it would make more sense. And if issues of health and safety were of utmost importance in lawmaking, it would follow that alcohol and tobacco would be illegal and not marijuana. However, since Prohibition was proven ineffective in the 1920s and since many states and influential corporations thrive on the tobacco industry, it seems highly unlikely these two substances will ever become illegal. So basically, we live with subjective legislation that uses lots of tax dollars to fruitlessly fight the war on drugs. If legal, the government would make money from marijuana sales. Luxury taxes which are now imposed on alcohol and tobacco would similarly generate revenue rather than lose money. The war costs the U.S. $450,000 to put a drug dealer in jail and, for once, I must agree with Dan Quayle, who said we have more important things to do, like prosecute rapists and murderers. Even so, few people ever face penalty. The threat of punishment rarely deters crime. In medieval England, where theft was punishable by execution, people would come to watch the public hangings to pickpocket other people. The bottom line is Americans rarely choose not to commit a crime based on the punishment that may be incurred. This is why the war on drugs is so ineffective. When Prohibition ended in the 1933, the murder rate declined as did organized crime. At the time, the government realized these increases were too high a price to pay compared to the drawbacks of alcohol. Legalization of marijuana might show similar results. A fallacy which supports anti-marijuana legislation is if we make a drug legal, the number of users will skyrocket. This is just inaccurate. People who don't use recreational drugs (or alcohol or tobacco for that matter) made a choice not to. It is not as if they are hopelessly left without access. And, it is not as if they would suddenly become addicts once the substance is legally attainable. Peoples decisions are based on moral values. Therefore, legalizing marijuana would not cause a significant increase in users. Advocates of California's Proposition 215 argue for legalization because of the drug's medicinal benefits. Marijuana can be used to treat glaucoma, muscular dystrophy, nausea due to chemotherapy and emphysema. If the drug's negative effects were as damaging as opponents say they are, then why would doctors recommend this drug over any FDA approved drug? The federal government's current stance against marijuana is simply not consistent with its policy regarding alcohol and tobacco. If it is left to the individual to regulate his or her substance intake, then there is no reason for any substance to be illegal. But if it is the government's role to provide a safe environment for its citizens, then all perceived harmful substances should be banned. This is not to say I want these drugs to be made illegal but the lawmakers need to address the fact that allowing some and not the others is simply not logical.