Medical Marijuana Prohibition: Facts and Values
There is a lot of smoke clouding the debate about Federal medical marijuana prohibition. All sides and every viewer in this debate levy the charge of “politics,” as if there is no verifiable data involved (only passionate appeals based on some relative value). Could that be true? Is such a question even possible if there were, in fact, no facts or values? Well, despite claims to the contrary, the 1960s did not kill all the values in America, because there are in reality both facts and values on which human beings can eternally rely to figure out how to live and live well.
Take Federal medical marijuana prohibition, for example. The proponents of this policy in 1937 said that it was a fact that marijuana caused people to commit violent crimes. One puff of a joint and it was said that a person was non-deterrable, a complete social menace. They also said that because Spanish-speakers reportedly used marijuana, therefore, the plant had to be prohibited. Both of these claims are self-evidently false. Most—many, if not all—of the people who use marijuana simply do not thereby go on to commit violent crimes. As to the other claim, it should go without saying that the Declaration does not admit of social policy based on racist worldviews.
Today there are no facts to support Federal medical marijuana prohibition. The Federal Government’s own scientists in 1999 concluded that marijuana has medical value, even in smoked form. Therefore, the Federal Government’s will nowadays does not rest on facts to support medical marijuana prohibition. It now asserts values like “protecting the children,” “fighting the narco-terrorists,” and “helping people” to support medical marijuana prohibition. Similar to 1937, however—well, more precisely, exactly like 1937—the Federal Government lacks a basis to prevent people from following the advice of their doctor.
Prohibition does not protect children. It is prohibition that gives children unsafe streets where drug dealers could prey on them. It is prohibition that gives children an opportunity to assume, wrongly, that the law is something to be broken. It is prohibition that exposes children to a black market where harder drugs and other dangerous items are freely available. Our kids are hardly better off under this paradigm.
Furthermore, prohibition does not prevent narco-terrorists. In fact, it is the opposite: prohibition creates narco-terrorists. If the narco-terrorists in Afghanistan, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela could not sell their wares for profit, then these nations would no longer have narco-terrorists. Prohibition created Al Capone. The Twenty First Amendment of the United States Constitution killed him. The War on Drugs created narco-terrorists. Only political courage can kill them.
Unfortunately, there is a serious lack of political courage in Washington, D.C. Americans themselves, however, still have a sense of courage, which is why they can spot the lack of it in a policy like Federal medical marijuana prohibition, which threatens seriously ill people with criminal punishment for merely following the advice of their doctor. It does not take political courage to adopt a policy that only seriously ill people have an incentive to fight—in fact, it takes the opposite.
However that may be, Federal medical marijuana prohibition is hardly the way to help people. The children and everyone else are better off without the narco-terrorists and the policy that creates them. The biggest part of the War on Drugs is marijuana prohibition, and the biggest part of that is medical marijuana prohibition. This is the fact of the matter and, unfortunately for court and country, there are no values to it. Put simply: the Federal Government lacks a rational basis to criminalize the sick and dying.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
Take Federal medical marijuana prohibition, for example. The proponents of this policy in 1937 said that it was a fact that marijuana caused people to commit violent crimes. One puff of a joint and it was said that a person was non-deterrable, a complete social menace. They also said that because Spanish-speakers reportedly used marijuana, therefore, the plant had to be prohibited. Both of these claims are self-evidently false. Most—many, if not all—of the people who use marijuana simply do not thereby go on to commit violent crimes. As to the other claim, it should go without saying that the Declaration does not admit of social policy based on racist worldviews.
Today there are no facts to support Federal medical marijuana prohibition. The Federal Government’s own scientists in 1999 concluded that marijuana has medical value, even in smoked form. Therefore, the Federal Government’s will nowadays does not rest on facts to support medical marijuana prohibition. It now asserts values like “protecting the children,” “fighting the narco-terrorists,” and “helping people” to support medical marijuana prohibition. Similar to 1937, however—well, more precisely, exactly like 1937—the Federal Government lacks a basis to prevent people from following the advice of their doctor.
Prohibition does not protect children. It is prohibition that gives children unsafe streets where drug dealers could prey on them. It is prohibition that gives children an opportunity to assume, wrongly, that the law is something to be broken. It is prohibition that exposes children to a black market where harder drugs and other dangerous items are freely available. Our kids are hardly better off under this paradigm.
Furthermore, prohibition does not prevent narco-terrorists. In fact, it is the opposite: prohibition creates narco-terrorists. If the narco-terrorists in Afghanistan, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela could not sell their wares for profit, then these nations would no longer have narco-terrorists. Prohibition created Al Capone. The Twenty First Amendment of the United States Constitution killed him. The War on Drugs created narco-terrorists. Only political courage can kill them.
Unfortunately, there is a serious lack of political courage in Washington, D.C. Americans themselves, however, still have a sense of courage, which is why they can spot the lack of it in a policy like Federal medical marijuana prohibition, which threatens seriously ill people with criminal punishment for merely following the advice of their doctor. It does not take political courage to adopt a policy that only seriously ill people have an incentive to fight—in fact, it takes the opposite.
However that may be, Federal medical marijuana prohibition is hardly the way to help people. The children and everyone else are better off without the narco-terrorists and the policy that creates them. The biggest part of the War on Drugs is marijuana prohibition, and the biggest part of that is medical marijuana prohibition. This is the fact of the matter and, unfortunately for court and country, there are no values to it. Put simply: the Federal Government lacks a rational basis to criminalize the sick and dying.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
posted by Kenneth Michael White | 8:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home