My best WAG as to why there isn’t more support for legalization is that, for a lot of average Americans, when they think of marijuana, they think of Cheech and Chong, or Jay and Silent Bob, or hippie stoners still stuck in the 60’s counterculture, and they think, why should we make it easier for them to be burned-out potheads? (That’s if they don’t mentally lump them into one big “druggies” category along with the crackheads and coke fiends and heroin addicts.)
Marijuana may well be no more harmful than alcohol or tobacco, but unlike those drugs, we don’t have many popular images of well-adjusted, responsible, respectable, productive members of society who use it.
There’s a lot of dirty politicking going on to keep Mary Jane illegal. And NORML, while well-meaning, is pretty incompetent as a force for legislative change. The effective and far less well-known lobby (that mostly has pushed for hemp and medical laws) is the Marijuana Policy Project
And yes, the reefer lobby isn’t nearly so well-funded nor organized as say, the alcohol lobby, who would prefer to eliminate any potential competitors that would erode market share (which is critical in the Booze Wars - even .5% share difference in some regions is a big deal.) Big Paper’s probably not interested in exploring hemp utility and low impact solutions either. And all the local, state and federal agencies that are the front line on the WAR ON DRUGS would prefer to keep their budgets. And it’s a lot easier to go after the casual pot user than say, the crack dealers or the meth labs. Less risk, same reward.
The only thing that’s going to truly push legalization forward on a federal level is money, effective outreach and awareness campaigns and armies of effective lawyers. Personally, I’m thinking the last big push that makes it so comes when the tobacco industry sees its domestic revenues get legislated out of existence. Who else has the production and cultivation infrastructure, and the distribution distribution network already in place?
At the moment, there’s a hell of a lot more money to be made (by the politicians) in keeping it illegal. At some point, that will change, and it it will be legal.
Odd that I find this post today, as I was just asking myself the same question on the drive home. I was listening to an old Cheech and Chong routine on the radio and I thought to myself that most of the kids of that time grew up with marijuana being common and probably do not object.
My guess is, the majority of the people do not feel strongly against, but also do not feel strongly enough in favor of legalizing and therefore the vocal minority wins.
i think a lot of it has to do with mass ignorance, perpetuated by years and years of misinformation campaigns. from reefer madness, to the widely held idea that “marijuana is a gateway drug”, to the idea that while making you less fertile, marijuana use increases your chance of unwanted pregnancy (i have seen ads proposing the latter and the former half of that last clause, though not in one ad), a large portion of the general public has been made to believe things that are completely untrue about the drug by those who believe its use is immoral and wish to force that view on us by legislation.
having said that, i happen to be in favor of the legalization of all drugs. however, i feel that’s a harder pill to swallow, and if it weren’t for this mass ignorance, marijuana would stand a pretty good chance of being at least deciminalized now.
During this last Presidential election, there was a ballot initiative in Alaska to legalize cannabis a la alcohol.
It failed 44.25% to 55.75%. If you look at vote breakup by age, 32% of 60+ and 37% 45-59 voted Yes. Those figures might be slightly higher/lower since the overall exit poll tabulates to 42.1% Yes as opposed to the actual 44.25%. Not to be crass, but marijuana legalization, at least in Alaska, should be a matter of two more election cycles, unless the DEA et al. have some aces up their sleeve.
Could part of the reason be de facto decriminilization? During 2004, three friends of mine had interactions with poliice officers involving possession of one ounce or less. These were 3 seperate situations. In 2 of the cases the officer kept the marijuana and told the “perp” to be more discrete. The fourth case was plead down to disorderly conduct and a one hundred dollar fine.
I would love to see marijuana legalized, but it is hard to stir up the electorate when the penalties are seen as no big deal.
Just wanted to comment on this. Generally, the government should have to do the opposite - prove why it should be illegal. If you can’t make a compelling case, it should be legal.
Were it a new law, definitely. And from more a liberal/libertarian perspective, yes, the government ought to have to justify every intrusion on our liberties. But from a more pragmatic point of view, a lot of people probably don’t see it as a big issue. Things are going along ok, no one they know is in jail for marijuana use, and why rock the boat? Sure, maybe pot’s not all that bad, but hey, it’s certainly not great. Why change what works? So in order to capture the public’s hearts and minds, and from a strictly logical/rhetorical standpoint (since any change to the status quo must be justified), pot does have to be proven reasonably safe to be made legal.
You know, one of the things I find funny about the anti-pot advertisements we are deluged with whenever we turn on a TV… you know, the ones where the parent catches the kid and in some coy and clever manner says they need to talk to them… they never, like, make a point of contacting the police or anything…
Nonsense. Are you suggesting that the government go through all public laws every now and then and make full explanations of why those laws should be on the books? What a colossal waste of time.
It’s the legalization proponents who want to change the law, and they should be able to make a good case of why it should be done. I simply haven’t heard a convincing case made so far. That’s why I have consistently voted against referenda for medicinal pot (since those that I have been voted on have been proposed by the same folks who have a transparent agenda for full legalization), and will continue to oppose legalization. I’m sure that there are lots of other Americans who feel the same way.
Let my try to step outside my own shoes for a moment. Those who usually argue most forcefully for the legalization of pot are generally pot users themselves. Good lord, what is most of America to think of pro-pot spokesmen have more in common, in the minds of Middle America, with hippies or criminals than with the common man on the street? Let’s just look at this as an image thing. Most Americans can relate to someone having a drink or two and still being a “normal guy” – like all those fans at football games, or your wine-and-cheese crowd, and so on.
In contrast, most Americans would probably see pot users as the glassy-eyed college students, hippies, vegans, hemp-wearing weirdos, and silly rebellious teenagers that come across like, well, dopes. Setting aside the irony of it, but is anyone here really surprised that Middle America agrees with Sid Vicious in the sentiment, “Never trust a hippie?”
If the pro-pot forces actually had their wits about them, there’d be an organized campaign that would NOT be run by such fringe elements that would attempt to distance pot from its distasteful associations with the counterculture. Until that happens, a heck of a lot of people will still be scared of pot; not because of its pharmacological effects, but because of the weirdos who are so interested in having pot legalized.
George Carlin used to say that the problem was that all the pot proponents kept forgetting where they left the petitions…
Another thing that the pot lovers forget is that legalization here doesn’t change what goes on elsewhere. Sure, people would begin to grow it domestically, but “connoisseurs” would still pay for the finest Colombian, etc.
The drug business is a leading cause of instability in Colombia. If not for the profits from the drug areas, the civil war there wouldnot be in its fourth decade, and it’s mostly due to the American appetite for the product.
It’s not exactly easy to look another country in the face and let them know that you support legislation that will lead directly to additional funds supplied to the thugs destroying the place.
I don’t use drugs, including alcohol or tobacco. In fact, caffeine is the only mind altering substance I ingest, but that barely has an effect on me (or rather it has an inverted effect, but that’s beside the point). I’m pro-legalization because the government should have to justify intrusions into our liberty. The argument “Because there is no compelling reason to curtail our freedom” should be sufficient, especially for an individual who considers themselves liberal. It is a stupidly conservative (in the literal, not political sense) to believe that simply because a law has been on the books for some time that it has any weight beyond the merits that its supporters can prove.
As for the general suggestion of reviewing laws from time to time that would actually be good. Legislatures pass a lot of legislation, because it looks good to be attached to a bill that is a response to some social ill. People campaign on passing laws, not on striking useless ones from the books, because this is a succesful way to campaign. This, I think, is the surest sign of voter idiocy, both here in America and abroad.
hardly. but in a legalization debate, when the discussion is under way, the de facto position should be a legal one. if one can’t come up with a good reason to keep something illegal, it should not be kept illegal. hell, the constitution more or less says that.
i agree that the movement suffers from an image problem, though. i think a lot of that has to do with the ignorance i mentioned earlier. a politician who believes in medical marijuana or decriminalization of what he feels has been shown to be a safe drug, can expect to ruin his career for bringing these views to light in a public forum. people are so backwards on the issue that we can’t even talk about the possible merits. dr. lester grinspoon of harvard medical school certainly believed marijuana had legitimate medical benefits for his son’s nausea as he underwent chemotherapy. but no one knows about that, because it is that of which we do not speak.
The war in Columbia is due to coca and poppy production, not marijuana. Marijuana is not as picky about the altitude it’s grown in as coca is and could be grown almost anywhere. Coca, on the other hand, loves the higher altitudes and climates of South America.
Coca was utilized by Andean cultures long before it started getting used for cocaine which is also why the Columbian government isn’t winning it’s “war”, but that’s another matter. Marijuana isn’t part of the problem there.
Have to call ya on that statement. The finest marijuana around today is grown in people’s homes. The plants are lovingly cared for, only female plants are grown, and seeds from some incredible strains are commercially available.
Weed from Columbia, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, etc is grown outdoors, often with little care. Hey, it’s a weed. Male plants pollenate the females leading to seed production. The harvest is compressed into dry bales since it has to be smuggled into the US.
At one time “home grown” was a put-down. Not today, however.
Personally, I’m all for legalization… and I’ve never done any drugs, and never will. It’s always seemed hypocritical to me that marijuana is illegal, and yet tobacco and alcohol are perfectly fine. I’m also alarmed by how many people have been imprisoned thanks to the War on Drugs, and how much money the government is spending on enforcing said War.
I see this as effectively saying, “I don’t care if someone can benefit from medical use of marijuana. We should arrest medical marijuana patients and suppliers because I believe people who support these medical marijuana laws only want to push for complete legalization.” Nice logic and compassion. :rolleyes:
Another thing worth looking at when deciding whether or not to legalize marijuana is why it is illegal in the first place. From what I can tell, marijuana is illegal because about 70 years ago some very powerful people told some very nasty lies about this plant. As a result a lot of people were frightened enough to support laws making marijuana and hemp illegal.
This is a superb idea. Maybe if legislators spent more time being forced to justify their activities, they would have less time to be passing and maintaining useless and harmful laws.
