Marijuana: Why It's Illegal and Why It Shouldn't Be

Marijuana has long been viewed as a dangerous substance by governments, health organizations, adults, and many more misinformed people. These so-called dangers have been disproved over and over again leaving many doors open for pro-legalization activists to step through. Much like alcohol during the Prohibition of the 1920s, marijuana has been wrongfully banned. The time is ripe for progressivism to once again take hold of such a dispute and see the legalization of a harmless drug.

Marijuana is a naturally grown plant. In its natural state (the state in which it is normally smoked) it is scientifically known as Cannabis sativa (Kowalski 3). Although normally the whole plant is smoked, it is delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, that is responsible for the "high" experienced by users (Kowalski 3). In contrast to tobacco, there are many different methods of smoking marijuana. Some of the more common methods include rolling it in cigar paper, rolling it in rolling paper, using a pipe, and using a bong. Over time, the drug has acquired numerous slang terms. Some of these terms are bud, Buddha, ganja, hashish, weed, reefer, pot, grass, Mary Jane, and dope (Erowid). The experience is normally referred to as being stoned, high, blazed, or smacked (Erowid).

Although marijuana is classified as a hallucinogen under United States Federal Law, the effects are not that of a hallucinogen. Its primary effects are strong euphoria, relaxation, and change in perception (Erowid). Marijuana does not have solid physical effects; however the extreme state of euphoria it causes can affect coordination. But that's enough about what marijuana is exactly. Let me explain the problem at hand.

Possession of marijuana, in the United States, has been made a criminal offense through devious methods. The government's stance on the matter is as set in stone as abiding by the constitution. Throughout history, even the most liberal presidents have been pressured into opposing the Rastafarian holy plant. Scientists with opposing viewpoints to those of the government have been squelched by threats to remove funding (Nadelmann 3). Government funding has historically been thrown freely at programs seeking to identify the "harmful" effects of marijuana. These programs have done nothing but skew statistics or utilize statistics that obscurely relate to what is being "proven." This will be further discussed. Don't worry, I'm not leaving you on a line here.

A beautiful example of this government manipulation is the following: In 1996, the former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala made a public statement, "All available research has concluded that marijuana is dangerous to our health." This statement, in the same year, was contested by the Drug Enforcement Agency's own administrative law judge, Francis Young, who said, "...in its natural form [marijuana] is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man" (Nadelmann 2).

This is a prime example of the government's manipulation on government funded organizations such as the Health and Human Services.

Governments have persistently used over-heard myths and falsifications about marijuana to support their stance. I am going to shine some light on these myths. The first outrageous claim to be handled is the notion that marijuana now is much more potent than it was when it gained its popularity in the 1970s. There are two reasons why this is untrue. First, to please the number-crunchers: Since 1981, THC levels have been monitored by the Potency Monitoring Project. This project has held that THC levels, between 1981 and the present, have fluctuated from 2.28% to 3.82%. The potency was, indeed, lower in the 1970s. However, this was primarily due to the high flow of low-grade (lower potency) marijuana that was being brought in from Mexico. Studies have been done on standard potency marijuana from the 1970s and numbers have been seen between 2% and 5%. They have even been recorded as high as 14% (Nadelmann 3)!

Now here is the heart of the rebuttal. Government studies have suggested levels of potency as low as 0.5% in the 1970s. The problem with this figure is that studies have also shown that THC levels as low as 0.5% have almost no psycho-activity, if any! To quote Ethan A. Nadelmann, "It's not very likely that marijuana would have become so popular during the 1970s if