essay on decriminalization of marijuana

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.109(2); Mar-Apr 2012

Legalization, Decriminalization & Medicinal Use of Cannabis: A Scientific and Public Health Perspective

Empirical and clinical studies clearly demonstrate significant adverse effects of cannabis smoking on physical and mental health as well as its interference with social and occupational functioning. These negative data far outweigh a few documented benefits for a limited set of medical indications, for which safe and effective alternative treatments are readily available. If there is any medical role for cannabinoid drugs, it lies with chemically defined compounds, not with unprocessed cannabis plant. Legalization or medical use of smoked cannabis is likely to impose significant public health risks, including an increased risk of schizophrenia, psychosis, and other forms of substance use disorders.

Introduction

In recent years, there has been a strong pressure on state legislatures across the US to legalize or decriminalize use and possession of specified amounts of cannabis and/or to pass laws that allow smoking of crude cannabis plant (also known as marijuana, weed, Mary Jane, pot, reefers, ganja, joint and grass) for prescribed medical purposes (so called “medical marijuana”). Advocacy groups claim that smoking cannabis is a safe and effective treatment for various psychological and medical conditions, ranging from stress and anxiety to Alzheimer’s dementia and Parkinson’s disease, even though cannabis is not approved for such use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Legalization of cannabis is the process of removing all legal prohibitions against it. Cannabis would then be available to the adult general population for purchase and use at will, similar to tobacco and alcohol. Decriminalization is the act of removing criminal sanctions against an act, article, or behavior. Decriminalization of cannabis means it would remain illegal, but the legal system would not prosecute a person for possession under a specified amount. Instead, the penalties would range from no penalties at all, civil fines, drug education, or drug treatment.

No state has legalized cannabis thus far. It remains a US federally-controlled substance, which makes possession and distribution illegal. However, at the time of this writing, 26 states in the US have passed either medical cannabis laws, cannabis decriminalization laws, or both. See Table 1 . A major concern of this commentary is that both the medicinal use of smoked cannabis plant and legalization/decriminalization of cannabis are being advocated in a way that circumvents the normal testing and regulatory processes by the FDA that is otherwise required for all drugs marketed for human use in the US. By circumventing this process, advocacy groups put state legislatures and/or voters in the position to decide on proposals with a certain impact on public health and medical treatment without necessarily being qualified to understand the pertinent scientific evidence.

US Cannabis Use Legislated into Law without FDA Approval

Taking advantage of the obscure legal status of cannabis (i.e., federally banned illicit drug but approved by local governments for medical and/or recreational purposes), businesses involving sales of cannabis are flourishing and even stock-market investments are available. For example, CannabisInvestments.com provides information on ways one can invest in hemp-related and medical marijuana products and companies. These business interest groups are ratcheting pressure on state legislatures to decriminalize or medicalize cannabis, counting on support of millions of addicted users and politicians looking for re-election votes and unaware of the dangers of such a legislative act.

History and Legal Status of Cannabis

Historically, cannabis has been used in various cultures and populations as indigenous therapy for a range of medical ailments (e.g., fever, insomnia, cachexia, headache, constipation, rheumatic pain) and diseases (e.g., venereal disease, malaria). Due to its presumed medical benefits, cannabis was recognized as an official, licit drug and listed in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia in 1850. Recreational use of cannabis surged in the 1930s during the Prohibition Era. In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act effectively thwarted all cannabis use without criminalizing its possession or use. In 1970, the Controlled Substances Act classified cannabis as schedule I illicit drugs, the most restrictive category, and made possession a federal crime.

Reefer Madness is a well-known 1936 American propaganda exploitation film revolving around the melodramatic events that ensue when high school students are lured by pushers to try “marijuana” — from a hit and run accident, to manslaughter, suicide, attempted rape, and descent into madness.

The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), which administers the Controlled Substances Act, continues to support the Schedule I assignment (and FDA concurred) noting that cannabis meets the three criteria for such placement under 21 U.S.C. 812(b):

• high potential for abuse;
• no currently accepted medical use in the US; and
• lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision.

A past evaluation by several Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) agencies, including FDA, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), concluded that no sound scientific studies supported medical use of marijuana and no animal or human data supported the safety or efficacy of marijuana for general medical use. 1

Popular Perception of Cannabis Use

In the public debate, cannabis has been considered a relatively benign recreational drug in comparison to opiates, stimulants, even alcohol. The favorable popular perception of cannabis presumably reflects the absence of dramatic physical signs of intoxication or withdrawal. Incidentally, cessation of cannabis use does cause withdrawal, but the severity is masked by the gradual release of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the major psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, from fat tissue (adipocytes) where it accumulates during chronic use. The process is not unlike the tapering of medication during detoxification.

The general public has not been adequately informed about recent scientific findings demonstrating major adverse effects of smoking cannabis on physical and especially mental health, the latter varying in range from cognitive dulling, brief psychotic experiences, to long-term addiction and chronic psychosis. 2 , 3

Epidemiology of Cannabis Use and Addiction

Cannabis (here referring to smoking of cannabis plants) is the most commonly used illicit drug in the US. Data from The National Survey on Drug Use and Health 4 , 5 indicate that 44% of males and 35% of females have used marijuana at least once in their life time. More recent studies suggest that regular use of marijuana is increasing. Data from National Survey on Drug Use and Health 6 indicate that in persons over the age of 12, the rate of past month cannabis use and the number of users in 2009 (6.6 percent or 16.7 million) were higher compared to 2008 (6.1% or 15.2 million) and 2007 (5.8% or 14.4 million).

Medicinal Use of Cannabinoids in Pill Form

Since THC was first isolated and purified 7 from the cannabis plant in 1965, more than 400 chemicals have been isolated, approximately 60 of which are cannabinoids, compounds that are the active agents of cannabis. Reflecting a rapidly growing interest in the therapeutic potential of cannabis, about 21 cannabinoids are currently under study by the US FDA. 8

More recently, two types of cannabinoid receptors have been identified: CB1 found mostly in the central nervous system and responsible for psychoactive properties of cannabis, and CB2 found mostly in the spleen, immune tissues, and peripheral blood, and responsible for immunological and anti-inflammatory effects of cannabis. 9 , 10 A group of endo-cannabinoids has been also identified, e.g., arachidonoylethanolamine or anandamide, as endogenous chemical modulators which mimic the actions of phytocannabinoids and activate cannabinoid receptors. 10 These discoveries have led to the development of numerous CB receptor agonists and antagonists and numerous studies have tested therapeutic indications for these compounds. Medications containing natural or synthetic cannabinoids currently approved or being considered for approval for medicinal use are listed below:

Dronabinol (proprietary name Marinol), a synthetic THC, is FDA approved as an antiemetic in patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy, as an appetite stimulant for weight loss/decreased food intake in AIDS patients, and less frequently to augment analgesic treatment. Dronabinol is a Schedule III medication, indicating it has some potential for psychological and physical dependence.

Nabilone (proprietary name Cesamet), is a synthetic cannabinoid. FDA approved for peroral treatment of nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients who have not responded to conventional antiemetics, and anorexia and weight loss in patients with AIDS. Nabilone is a Schedule II medication, with high potential for mental health side effects and addiction.

Sativex , a liquid extract from cannabis plant, is used as oral spray (“liquid marijuana”), contains THC, cannnabidiol (CBD), and other cannabinoids. Sativex has been approved for neuropathic pain, emesis, overactive bladder, and spasticity in several countries including England, Canada, and Spain. Phase III studies of Sativex are currently underway in the US, thus it does not have a schedule assigned to it.

These medications have been approved for specific indications (nausea, vomiting, cachexia) and are currently studied for a number of new indications, such as spastic syndromes, neurological disorders, neuropathic pain, and other pain syndromes, among others. Note that use of medications that have been tested and approved by the FDA is not controversial. What is objectionable is that current efforts to legalize cannabis crude plant use state legislative processes to bypass federal regulatory processes that were put in place specifically to protect the public health.

Suggested Non-FDA Approved Uses of Cannabinoids and Smoked Cannabis

Suggested but as of yet not FDA-approved indications for smoked cannabis and/or cannabinoids include spastic syndromes in neurological disorders, pain syndromes, and glaucoma. We reviewed about 70 studies of oral cannabinoids and the few available studies of smoked cannabis for a number of medical indications. As expected, prescription cannabinoids are effective antiemetics and appetite stimulants, and some studies report their effectiveness as adjunct therapy in chronic pain syndromes, spasticity, and glaucoma. Similar results are reported by the few studies of smoked cannabis plant for these same indications. As noted earlier, safe and effective alternative treatments for all these syndromes are available. Studies assessing psychological aspects of smoked cannabis and prescription cannabinoids uniformly report undesired effects: acute psychosis, poorer prognosis of chronic psychosis, or cognitive dulling in medical patients. In other words, in addition to a number of adverse medical effects (next section), psychological effects of cannabis are common and detrimental. Unfortunately, we found no long-term studies investigating whether and how frequently chronic use of small amounts of cannabis for medicinal purposes develops into cannabis abuse and/or addiction.

Adverse Medical Effects of Cannabis and THC

The extant scientific literature by and large reflects the harmful effects of inhaled cannabis smoke. In what follows we review some of these reports.

Respiratory

Many of the same mutagens and carcinogens found in tobacco smoke are found in marijuana smoke as well. 11 Marijuana smoking has been shown to decrease pulmonary function, produce chronic cough, airway inflammation and abnormal cell growth that may antecede the onset of cancer. 12 However, the International Agency for Research on Cancer found the epidemiologic data inconclusive as to the increased risk of cancer from cannabis use versus that of tobacco smokers. 13 In contrast to tobacco, marijuana-smoking lung injury is not reversed on abstinence. 14

Immunologic

In humans, an increase in mortality of HIV-positive cannabis users has been observed. 15

Cardiovascular

Direct stimulation of the cardiac pacemaker by marijuana leads to an increase in heart rate making THC unsafe in cardiac patients. 14

Daily cannabis use is a risk factor for fibrosis progression via steatogenic effects, thus, daily cannabis use in patients with liver disease is contraindicated. 16 Cannabis users metabolize and activate or inactivate drugs more slowly than normal, 17 potentiating the deleterious effects of the drugs.

Endocrine and Reproductive Systems

In preclinical studies, cannabinoids have shown inhibitory effects on pituitary luteinizing hormone, prolactin, growth hormone, and thyroid stimulating hormone with little effect on follicle-stimulating hormone. 18 , 19 Marijuana can disrupt female reproductive health. 20 Women who smoke marijuana during pregnancy are more likely to have low birth weight infants possibly from a shorter gestation. 21 The effects of maternal marijuana use on infant development have not been systematically studied. However, the lipid solubility of THC allows for rapid transit in breast milk, where it has been shown to accumulate and eventually pass to the newborn. 22

Carcinogenesis

Cannabis use increases the incidence of testicular germ cell tumors – TGCT. 23 The authors observed a 70% increased risk of TGCT associated with current marijuana use, and the risk was particularly elevated for current use that was at least weekly or that began in adolescence. These associations were independent of known TGCT risk factors.

Effects of Smoked Cannabis on Mental Health

Smoking cannabis has a number of acute and chronic pathogenic effects on human mental health. 3 , 24 Direct causal effects of chronic use are difficult to scientifically establish because the condition cannot be randomly assigned or manipulated experimentally for ethical reasons. Nevertheless, prospective population studies indicate that early cannabis use frequently serves as a prelude (or “gateway”) to other illicit drug use. Despite occasional non-confirmatory results, the “gateway sequence” is the most common pattern in the sequential progression in drug use, 25 where marijuana use often is the initial step leading towards more powerful and more harmful drugs.

The mental effects of smoked cannabis include mental slowness, “relaxation”, tiredness, euphoria, and some users report anxiety and paranoia. Acute negative effects on cognition and performance, limited to periods of intoxication, have been all well-documented. 26 , 27 Long-term effects of cannabis use on cognitive performance involve subtle and selective impairments of specific higher cognitive functions 27 , 28 including an impaired ability to focus attention and filter out irrelevant information, which is progressive with the cumulative duration of exposure to cannabis. 29 These effects of chronic use recover only partially in ex-cannabis users, but the past duration of cannabis use continued to have an adverse effect on the ability to effectively reject complex irrelevant information. 30

Remodeling of Brain Reward Circuits - Cannabis Addiction

Active ingredients in cannabis, THC in particular, affect neurophysiological and behavioral systems in ways similar to addictive drugs. 31 Cannabis use is associated with reinforcing pleasurable feelings of reward and euphoria either through direct effects on CB1 receptors expressed in N. Accumbens or through collateral circuits (including endogenous opiate receptors) with similar effects on the reward pathway in the brain. 31 In most cases, addictive drugs “reset” the threshold for stimulation of the reward pathway at a higher level, where only supraphysiological stimulation by drugs can generate the desired feeling of reward. This “hijacking” of the reward pathway reduces the motivational power of natural rewards (e.g. food, opportunity to mate, relationships, etc) and thus reshapes normal motivational priorities. With repeated stimulation of this pathway, cannabis use induces neural plasticity and alters reward-based learning, 32 all leading to phenomenological and behavioral features typical of addiction. Suggestive of its high addictiveness, cannabis is the most commonly used illicit drug in the US and rate of its use continues to rise. 4 , 5 , 6

Cannabis Use and Well-Being

Proponents of cannabis use argue that smoking cannabis provides relaxation and pleasure, enhances the sense of well being, contributes to stress-relief, and helps to deal with hard reality. Of course, any enhancement of well being of a mentally healthy person through use of a psychoactive substance is some sense an oxymoron. Furthermore, cannabis use decreases cortical dopamine 33 which plays a major role in higher cognitive functions, working memory, executive function, etc. Hence, the “relaxed” feeling most cannabis users report as a desirable acute effect, in all likelihood reflects cognitive dulling (“amotivational syndrome”) caused by decreases in cortical dopamine. In other words, the weight of evidence indicates that cannabis creates cognitive dulling rather than reduction in anxiety, indifference rather than relaxation, and amotivation rather than inner peace, all closer to psychopathology than to well being.

Cannabis Use and Work Performance

There is an ongoing debate whether cannabis use interferes with people’s ability to work, relate to others, and/or live a normal life. Recent research clearly shows that any work that requires cognitive involvement and decision making is affected by cannabis use. 27 , 28 , 29 , 34 In a study of young, otherwise mentally and physically healthy cannabis users, Wadsworth et al 28 report an association between cannabis use and impairment in cognitive function and mood but not with workplace errors (although there was an association with lower alertness and slower response organization). Users experienced working memory problems at the start, and psychomotor slowing and poorer episodic recall at the end of the work week. This highlights the importance of the timing of testing within the context and routine of everyday life. In a separate study of the same sample, cannabis use had a significant negative impact on safety at work (such as self-reported accidents), road traffic accidents, and minor injuries. 34 Those who had higher levels of other risk factors associated with accidents and who also used cannabis were more likely to report an accident in the previous year. Thus, it is possible that cannabis-related effects were linked to an amplification of other risk factors associated with accidents and injuries. 34

Cannabis Use and Mental Health in the General Population

According to the study 35 of 18,500 cannabis smokers published by Statistics Netherlands in October 2010, cannabis users suffer mental health problems twice as often as nonusers. The relative risk of mental problems was doubled in male and female cannabis users (20% and 28%, respectively) compared to male and female nonusers (10% and 14%, respectively). Most common mental health issues reported by cannabis users were anxiety, melancholy, sadness, and impatience. In contrast, physical health of users and nonusers barely differed. Though technically illegal, the Netherlands decriminalized the consumption and possession of less than 5 grams (0.18 ounces) of cannabis in 1976 under an official “tolerance” policy.

Taking advantage of the obscure legal status of cannabis, businesses involving sales of cannabis are flourishing and even stock-market investments are available.

For example, CannabisInvestments. com provides information on ways one can invest in hemp-related and medical marijuana products and companies.

CNS Effects of Chronic Cannabis Use

Recently, specific pathogenic effects of cannabis on human brain tissue have been documented. Using high-resolution (3-T) structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Yucel et al 36 determined long-term heavy cannabis use is associated with gross anatomical abnormalities in two cannabinoid receptor–rich regions of the brain, the hippocampus and the amygdala. Subects were healthy males with long-term (more than 10 years) and heavy (more than five joints daily) cannabis use with no history of poly-drug use or neurologic/mental disorders. Cannabis users had bilaterally and significantly reduced hippocampal and amygdala volumes, with changes greater in the hippocampus. In fact, left hemisphere hippocampal volume was inversely associated with cumulative exposure to cannabis during the previous 10 years as well as with subthreshold positive psychotic symptoms. Positive psychosis symptom scores were also associated with cumulative exposure to cannabis.

Cannabis Use and the Risk of Schizophrenia, Psychosis, and Affective Disorders

Cannabis use is among the environmental factors associated with increased risk and worsened prognosis of schizophrenia and some data suggest a causal effect. 3 Cannabis use also is associated with more prevalent expressions of a wider psychosis phenotype. Isolated psychotic symptoms have reported prevalences of 5–15% among chronic cannabis users. 2 , 3 Although causality remains difficult to infer from observational studies, the weight of the evidence appears to favor a causal contribution from cannabis use for the development of Schizophrenia and psychosis. 2

Recent meta-analyses lend further support to the hypothesis that cannabis use causally contributes to the increased risk of development of schizophrenia. In a comprehensive and systematic meta-analysis, Moore et al 37 determined whether cannabis use contributes causally to the development of nonsubstance psychiatric illness, such as schizophrenia and affective disorders. The study was designed to address as much as possible two of the most important methodological problems in studying the relation between cannabis use and psychosis: 1) the potential for reverse causality (where psychosis causes cannabis use and not vice versa) and 2) the transitory intoxication effects (that is misinterpreted as psychosis as the false positive error). The results indicated that the risk of psychosis is increased by roughly 40% (pooled adjusted OR: 1.41) in cannabis users. The results were not as impressive for affective disorders. Within the users, a dose-response effect was observed with the risk more than doubled (OR =2.1) in the most frequent users. For cannabis and psychosis, there was evidence of confounding effects, but the associations persisted in almost all studies, even after adjustment for comprehensive lists of variables. The authors concluded that “there is now sufficient evidence to warn young people that using cannabis could increase their risk of developing a psychotic illness later in life” (page 319).

In a meta analysis of peer-reviewed publications in English reporting age at onset of psychotic illness in substance using and non–substance using groups Large et al 38 found an association between cannabis use and earlier onset of psychosis (the effect was not seen with alcohol). The authors suggest the need for renewed warnings about the potentially harmful effects of cannabis. Similar findings are reported by other authors. 39

Genetic Moderation of Cannabis Effect on Psychosis

One of the most puzzling aspects of cannabis-associated psychosis is that schizophrenia is not rising in incidence to reflect prevalent cannabis use. The likely answer is that there is variation in individual sensitivity to the psychosis-inducing effects of cannabis. In other words, individuals who have a greater biological vulnerability to psychosis are more likely to develop psychotic experiences when exposed to cannabis. As an example, the COMT Val/Val genotype is a risk factor for schizophrenia in the general population 40 presumably by providing a pathological substrate, such as low dopamine in the frontal cortex 40 and high mesolimbic dopamine. 41 Both conditions are believed to contribute to schizophrenia symptoms. Carriers of the COMT Val/Val genotype have low cortical dopamine but do not automatically develop schizophrenia. Rather, this genotype is considered to be a matter of individual variability in the level of cortical dopamine. Hovever, carriers of this genotype, who were also chronic cannabis users as adolescents, have a dramatically (up to 10 times) higher risk of psychosis 42 compared to adult-onset cannabis users with the same genotype. Cannabis use is reported to further decrease cortical 33 and increase mesolimbic dopamine 43 possibly amplifying the preexisting, genetically created dopamine deficit. If occurring during the sensitive developmental period of adolescence, such augmentation may synergistically facilitate the onset of psychosis. Similar interactive synergism was recently described for the AKT1 gene and cannabis. 45

Finally, recent study by Welch et al 44 was the first longitudinal study to demonstrate an association between thalamic volume loss and exposure to cannabis in people currently unaffected by Schizophrenia but with increased risk for the illness due to positive family history. As Welch et al 44 conclude, this finding may be important in understanding the link between cannabis exposure and the subsequent development of Schizophrenia.

Empirical and clinical studies reviewed here clearly demonstrate pathological effects of cannabis smoking on physical and especially mental health as well as its interference with social and occupational functioning. We did not find a single methodologically sound study to suggest that the benefits of smoking cannabis outweigh the associated risks. These negative data far outweigh documented benefits for a limited set of medical indications for which safe and effective alternative treatments are readily available. However, advocacy groups are pursuing legalization or medical use of smoked cannabis, largely ignoring pills containing extracted THC and other cannabinoids. It appears therefore that it is not the benefit of active cannabis ingredients, but the route of administration, a wider set of indications, and the ritual of use that’s being advocated. Based on the empirical and clinical evidence reviewed here, it seems safe to conclude that, if there is any medical role for cannabinoid drugs, it lies with chemically modified extracts, not with unprocessed cannabis plant.

Dragan M. Svrakic, MD, PhD, and Patrick J. Lustman, PhD, practice at the Washington University School of Medicine and the Veterans Administration Medical Center in St. Louis. Ashok Mallya, MD, Taylor Andrea Lynn, PhD, and Rhonda Finney, RN, practice at the Veterans Administration Medical Center. Neda M. Svrakic, is at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Contact: [email protected]

None reported.

The Decriminalization of Marijuana Research Paper

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

History of marijuana decriminalization, effects of the decriminalization of marijuana, works cited.

The debate on whether to or not to decriminalize possession and use of cannabis has been in existence for quite a long time. Some individuals have been against the idea that just by one simply being found with the substance could warrant him or her severe punishment as a jail term. Up to date marijuana possession is treated as a criminal offence in most countries. This means anyone found in possession of the substance is charged in the court and either subjected to a jail term or a fine.

This debate has come up with several important arguments on why decriminalization of this substance is appropriate (Australian Institute of Criminology, and the New South Wales Department of Politics 7). One of the main reasons that the supporters of this argument have progressed is that by decriminalization of marijuana, the government would save huge amounts of money that it uses on enforcing laws that relate to possession and use of the substance.

In addition, reports from various commissions and academic studies that have been carried out in the last two decades have indicated that decriminalization of marijuana has little or no contribution to its increase in use among the populations in the state where the new law has been enacted.

There have been active movements’ activities that have sought to reform the laws on marijuana since the 1970s in various nations. The increase in the use of the marijuana even after it was outlawed has led to increase in the costs incurred by the government when enforcing these rules and undertaking court proceedings.

In addition, the attitudes that most individuals had regarding the substance use was becoming more positive. This made many states and nations begin reforming the strict rules they had placed on the offences of being found in possession of marijuana. For instance, the period between 1923 and 1978 saw thirteen states in the United States decriminalizing the small amounts of marijuana possession.

These states were “Alaska, Colorado, Massechusetts, California, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, Missisippi, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon and Ohio.” This was after Oregon State began this process where it reduced the possession offence of an individual found with less than 1 oz by inflicting a small fine of not more than 100 dollars.

This was contributed by change of people’s attitudes towards marijuana and an increase in cases of more individuals especially those who came from influential backgrounds being found in the possession of the substance. As a result of the enforcement of the new laws, the jail terms or other strict rules were replaced by only a small fine in most states.

The decriminalization of possession of marijuana in various states had great impacts on various issues in the society. These changes were observed in various aspects like patterns of use, costs of justice and even health care.

Impacts on the pattern of use

Initially there was fear that decriminalization of marijuana would lead to the increase in the use of the substance within the population. This is especially after the survey by the US Government confirmed that 25.8 million individuals used marijuana once a year while the percentage that use the drug monthly was about 6 percent. The report also showed that in the American population, about 95 million individuals, about 47 percent of the entire population, experiment with marijuana in their lifetime.

However, there were no reliable changes in the rates of use in most states after the decriminalization law was enacted. According to a study conducted by Rosalie, Jamie, and Janna (23), the states that decriminalized marijuana noted only slight changes while in other states, there was no change at all. For instance, in the states that noted a slight increase, the percentage was only 2 percent among the students in high school and other juveniles.

When a comparison was done between the states that have decriminalized and those that have not, it was noted that in the decriminalized states, rates increased immediately the law was enacted but later leveled in most states for both those who had decriminalized and those who had not. Single (459) therefore concludes that there was no considerable change even with enactment of the decriminalization of marijuana rule.

The other survey that was carried out was on the rate of those who were found in the possession of marijuana after decriminalization law. According to study that was carried out, there was no direct effect between the relationship of the number of offenders and the punishment imposed.

However, due to the effect the offender gets both in the access to future employment and the stigma that the family and other members of the society hold the culprit with, the possession would be low regardless of whether the decriminalization was passed or not.

This is particularly because possession of marijuana is still a major issue in the society even with the elimination of the punishment. The controls are therefore enacted by the social environment and the individual’s career prospects. This is because an employer may refuse to recruit an individual who has records of marijuana possession.

Impacts on crime

There was also a major concern on the effect of decriminalization of marijuana on the rate of crime. Most individuals saw the enactment of this law as a factor that would lead to an increase in the rate of crime. Most individuals arrived at this conclusion from the analysis they had of the comparison of those who often ended up in jail where the greatest percentage had used drugs in the recent period before they were convicted.

However, this is a conclusion that has no substantial evidence. This is because other factors especially the social-economic factors are active causes of increase in the rate of crime (Erickson 1156). On close scrutiny, therefore, marijuana use has little relation with individual’s criminal behavior.

According to a review carried out on drug control policies, marijuana was rated the least in its ability to generate activities related to crime compared to other illicit drugs like heroine and cocaine. The review also noted that marijuana has less chances of triggering violent activities since those who use the drug are those from middle and upper social economic classes. Decriminalization of marijuana may not be a reason for increase in the rate of crime in the society (Erickson 1166).

Impacts on Criminal Justice system

The decriminalization of marijuana had an impact on the criminal justice system which was largely viewed as being positive especially due to the economic impact it had on this area. This is because offences related to marijuana possession dropped in all the states that implemented the new law where most states reduced this rate to more than 30 percent (National Academy of Sciences 102).

As a result, these states observed a remarkable decrease in the costs that were incurred in the enforcement of laws related to possession of marijuana. In addition, as a result of fewer cases being taken to court, there was reduction in the resources and costs that were initially spent in processing these cases. This is because before decriminalization law was enacted, marijuana possession cases dominated the court proceedings thus taking up most of the resources.

The cost saving has been felt in all levels of law enforcement systems. The correction system was another area that observed reduction in the cost factor. This is in areas like jail, prison and even those who were on probation.

There were many individuals who would be arrested for crimes related to marijuana making the number to be as high as 755,000. This was an expensive burden to the crime and justice system. This is because among those who would end up in these arrests, most of the individuals would earn a jail term or at least spend some time in there while waiting to be released.

This was a big expense to the system as they had to pass through the booking process which is the most expensive process in the correction process. The reduction in the number of individuals who were arrested due to possession of marijuana, therefore, was a major factor in the reduction of these costs as the reduction of these cases reduced the costs incurred and even ensured the safety of the system facility.

On evaluation of these costs and benefits, one would conclude that decriminalization has been beneficial to the states that have enacted the new law. However, it is important to understand that some of these figures were based on scientific data some of which may not have a large impact. This is particularly because very few states undertook the research before and after the decriminalization law was enacted.

As a result, most of the conclusions that were made, results were arrived at on the basis of comparison. This is because there was no availability of primary data that would have been used to make authentic conclusions. In addition, lack of jurisdiction in these countries where decriminalization of marijuana has been enacted like the United States and Canada have made it hard to evaluate the marijuana use adequately. This is especially after the policy of decriminalization was enacted.

The conclusion that decriminalization of marijuana reduces government expenses especially due to reduction of costs in the areas of criminal justice and correction systems, may be refuted. This is because individuals making such a conclusion have to understand that the government places a fixed amount on these systems which means that it does not reduce its level of this amount based on reduction or increase in the number of activities that the criminal justice undertake.

Otherwise this reduction would only be visible and significant to the government spending if the police who undertake these activities were laid off and the court rooms stopped all their activities. Since decriminalization of marijuana is not likely to lead to such dramatic changes, the current cost saving figures being generated by various commissions may be overlooking some important factors leading to their misguided conclusions.

The only benefit that decriminalization may be counted to have caused in the criminal justice system that seems authentic is reduction of its expenses on the enforcement of marijuana laws and directing these resources to more meaningful areas like crimes that are more serious and which affect the whole population.

In order to help parents and the voters to come up with an informed decision on the impact of decriminalization policy on the economy and the changes in the rates of crimes, the various commissions and academic studies need to establish a way of acquiring primary data where possible in order to avoid misleading the public.

Reduction of the punishment met on those found in possession or using marijuana by various states is definitely a positive move. Though there were speculations that decriminalizing marijuana would increase its consumption among the populations of these states, studies have shown that there is little or no evidence to these speculations.

Reduction in amount used in the enforcement of marijuana laws has also given the criminal justice system a chance to use these funds in more meaningful areas. However, lack of primary data has resulted to making important decisions based on comparison or through use of secondary data.

In addition, lack of new cases of jurisdictions that have passed through this process of decriminalization has led to a decision that may be detrimental due to overgeneralization and use of assumptions. In order to come up with a decision that will be beneficial to all aspects of a nation, the various commissions involved need to also focus on the effect that the cost reduction has after the enactment of decriminalization policy especially to the tax payer.

This is as opposed to making a general conclusion that since there was reduction in number of cases the criminal justice system and the court handled, there was equal reduction in the government expenses. This is because some of these reductions may not have been very meaningful to the common tax payer as the government still pumped the same amount of funds to these institutions.

Australian Institute of Criminology, and the New South Wales Department of Politics. Marijuana in Australia, patterns and attitudes . Monograph Series No. 31. Canberra, Australia: Looking Glass Press, 1997. Print.

Erickson, Patricia G. “The law, social control, and drug policy: Models, factors and processes.” The International Journal of the Addictions 28. 2; (1993): 1155-1176. Print.

National Academy of Sciences. Marijuana and medicine: Assessing the science base . Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999. Print.

Rosalie, Pacula, Jamie Chriqui, and Janna King. Marijuana decriminalization: what does it mean in the United States? Working Paper 9690. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2003. Print.

Single, Eric. “The impact of marijuana decriminalization: an update.” Journal of Public Health Policy 10.4; (1989): 456-466. Print.

• Government Concentration of State Power
• The Marijuana Industry and Its Benefits
• Marijuana Legalization: Chronic Seizure Treatment
• The Marijuana Usage Legislation
• Drugs Decriminalization and Legalization Issues
• North Korea Political Concepts
• Leveraging the Five Intelligence Disciplines to Access the Threat and Urgency of Iran’s Nuclear Program
• The Role of US Government on Abortions
• Drug Cartels in Mexico
• Primary responsibilities of U.S. Federal and State Government
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, December 27). The Decriminalization of Marijuana. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-decriminalization-of-marijuana/

"The Decriminalization of Marijuana." IvyPanda , 27 Dec. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/the-decriminalization-of-marijuana/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'The Decriminalization of Marijuana'. 27 December.

IvyPanda . 2018. "The Decriminalization of Marijuana." December 27, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-decriminalization-of-marijuana/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Decriminalization of Marijuana." December 27, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-decriminalization-of-marijuana/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Decriminalization of Marijuana." December 27, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-decriminalization-of-marijuana/.

• Decriminalization of Marijuana: Advantages and Disadvantages Words: 1538
• Legalizing Marijuana: Analysis of Arguments Words: 1408
• The Legalization of Marijuana in Canada Words: 1993
• National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Words: 1632
• Marijuana Should Be Legalized in the United States Words: 2280
• Health Law: Legalization of Marijuana in the US Words: 822
• Legalization of Recreational Marijuana Words: 2526
• Legalization of Marijuana in the Commonwealth of Virginia Words: 2770
• Perspectives of Legalizing Marijuana in Texas Words: 963
• Should the Federal Government Legalize the Use of Marijuana? Words: 1399
• The Pros of Legalizing Marijuana Words: 2852
• Arguments Against the Legalization of Marijuana Words: 969
• Should Marijuana Be Legal in United States? Words: 1109

Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws

Introduction, benefits of decriminalizing marijuana, marijuana use and crime rate, works cited.

Decriminalization of marijuana law is replacing “current criminal penalties for marijuana processions with civil penalty and fines” (StoptheDrugWar.org). According to Jeffrey Miron, director of undergraduate studies at Harvard University’s economics department, “marijuana legalization would mean repeal of federal and state laws that ban production, distribution, and possession of marijuana” (Dubner). Already, some states have decriminalized marijuana possession. This States includes California, Colorado, North Carolina, New York, Oregon, Massachusetts and Ohio (Suellentrop) when done in a controlled manner; the benefits of decriminalizing Marijuana are far too many both at States and National level.

Decriminalization of marijuana would lead to fewer arrests of law abiding citizens who use marijuana. It will also cause increase in the number of people who access and use marijuana. This would shift the demand from alcohol, cocaine and other highly hard drugs to marijuana. Unlike tobacco and alcohol which people use on a daily basis, marijuana smokers use it on occasional basis, usually on a weekly or monthly basis. Most marijuana users are young and studies have shown that as young people grow old, they are able to wean themselves off marijuana. As such, marijuana users are not likely to become addicts (Dubner).

Currently, United States government spend over $ 13 billion dollars in enforcing marijuana related laws and court process. A further $ 17 billion is used in correction facilities where marijuana related offenders are locked up (Dubner). By decriminalizing marijuana, the federal and state government will save a lot of money. This added to the money gained from taxation of marijuana just like tobacco and alcohol is taxed would save the federal government over 40 Billion annually. This money can greatly boost the economy especially during this period when U.S. is experiencing hard economic times. Both federal agent and prosecutor should focus their effort on “crimes involving violence and high level trafficking” (Kelley)

Putting law abiding citizen in jail for procession of marijuana will not make the society safer. Underground illegal sale and use of Marijuana is associated with drugs kings and organized gangs. The profits realized from illegal sale and marijuana trafficking is used in supporting organized crimes and street gangs. This has resulted in increased crime rate as gangs can easily get funding to carry out crimes. Legalizing and regulating cultivation, sale and use of marijuana will go a long way in reducing the financial gains that goes to underground gangs. This will help to put criminals out of business, and consequently reduce crime rates in America.

Those people who use marijuana come into contact with people who sell and use other illegal drugs in the backstreets and underground avenues as they try to hide from law enforcement officers (James Austin). While it might seem that marijuana may make a person switch to hard drugs like heroin and cocaine, it is by criminalizing marijuana that make a person switch to other drugs. Use of drugs like cocaine, heroin etc have been shown to increase the likely hood of committing crime, consequently marijuana user who decides to switch to these drugs may have high chances of committing crimes. By decriminalizing marijuana, users can comfortably take marijuana in safe secure place where they won’t come into contact with people who use hard drugs like cocaine. This helps in reducing possible abuse of other drugs and hence reducing crime.

Proponents of decriminalization of marijuana have raised genuine concern about the rate of crime going up as a result of decriminalization. Their concern is based on correctional analysis which shows that a high percentage of offenders in correctional facilities have at one time used drugs (James Austin). The truth is, this analysis is flawed since there are many factors that make a person engage in criminal activities. These factors include demographics, social economics, etc. There is a very little evidence that shows a direct link between criminal behavior and marijuana use.

In California, Alaska, New York, North Carolina and Colorado where marijuana have been decriminalized, it amazing that there is no evidence whatsoever that more people are into drug abuse or increase in crime as the opponents of decriminalization want everyone to believe. In these states, it impossible to tell who take marijuana or who don’t as there is no marked behavior change of those who take marijuana. The rate of crime has not increased or gone down because criminal activities does is not directly related to Marijuana use. As such, society would not be more or less safer with decriminalization of marijuana.

Currently both federal and state criminal justice system allocate large portion of the budget to cater for arresting, prosecuting, sentencing and incarcerating marijuana users, dealers and others involved in the illegal drug infrastructure such as transporters, manufacturers of drug paraphernalia” (James Austin). Decriminalization of Marijuana would free substantial amount of resources used by law enforcement in fight against marijuana. These resources can be focused in fighting and preventing other serious crimes like terrorism and organized crimes leading to safer society. In 2001 alone, the State of California saved over $180 million as a result of fewer arrest, prosecution and incarceration of marijuana users.

There is a growing need to change the current law governing the use and possession of marijuana. States which have decriminalized marijuana have benefited financially from reduced arrest, prosecution and incarceration of law abiding users. Marijuana users are not necessary criminal and as such decriminalizing marijuana law will not lead to increased or decreased crimes. Decriminalization of Marijuana comes at a price. It is important to back it up with necessary campaigns to sensitize the public on the risks associated with use of marijuana. Users must be compelled to take marijuana responsibly in a secure environment, and be able to lead a normal life in raising families, pursuing life careers and participating in civic duties. Only people who have are beyond legal limit should have access to marijuana. It’s important to establish guideline similar to those in place for alcohol use to ensure marijuana is used within set boundaries.

Dubner, Stephen. “What Would Happen if Marijuana Were Decriminalized?.”2009. A Freakonomics Quorum. Web.

James Austin. “Rethinking the Consequences of Decriminalizing Marijuana.” 2005.

Working to Reform Marijuana Laws. 2010. Web.

Kelley, Matt. ” Marijuana legalization, War On Drugs.” 2009. Are We Moving Toward Marijuana Decriminalization? Web.

StoptheDrugWar.org. “Marijuana: Massachusetts Decriminalization Initiative Polling Well.” 2008. Stop the Drug War. Web.

Suellentrop, Chris. “US: Which States Have Decriminalized Marijuana Possession?” 2001. Media Awareness. Web.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, December 7). Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws. https://studycorgi.com/decriminalization-of-marijuana-laws/

"Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws." StudyCorgi , 7 Dec. 2021, studycorgi.com/decriminalization-of-marijuana-laws/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws'. 7 December.

1. StudyCorgi . "Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws." December 7, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/decriminalization-of-marijuana-laws/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws." December 7, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/decriminalization-of-marijuana-laws/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws." December 7, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/decriminalization-of-marijuana-laws/.

This paper, “Decriminalization of Marijuana Laws”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: December 7, 2021 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

• DEPC Overview
• Policy and Data Analyses
• Reports and Studies
• Marijuana and Drug Policy Research Grants
• Student Papers

Five Decades of Marijuana Decriminalization

Exploring the limited and disparate impact of fragmented reforms.

The topic of drug decriminalization has gained considerable attention in the United States after Oregon voted in November 2020 to decriminalize all drugs in that state. While we consider the possible impacts of broader drug decriminalization efforts, it is useful to look back at the five decades of marijuana decriminalization for lessons on effects and implementation.

In 1972, the US National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, known as the Shafer Commission, issued a report advocating a “social control policy seeking to discourage marihuana use” but asserting that criminal law was “too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession even in efforts to discourage use.” In 1973, Oregon became the first state to implement the recommendations of the Shafer Commission by decriminalizing marijuana statewide. Ten states followed suit in the next five years: Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine and Ohio in 1975; Minnesota in 1976; Mississippi, New York and North Carolina in 1977; and Nebraska in 1978. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter even urged Congress to consider marijuana decriminalization. The decriminalization movement stalled throughout the 80’s and 90’s with President Reagan’s focus on the war on drugs, but the 2000’s brought a sustained attention to the issue with a wave of decriminalization efforts, medical-use and adult-use cannabis legalizations across 35 states, and a rapidly changing public opinion.

The terminology surrounding “decriminalization” and “legalization” can be unclear, in part because marijuana reforms take many different forms. Here are working definitions for this discussion:

• Decriminalization  is defined as no arrest, prison sentence, or criminal record for certain possession offenses (though a fine may still be applicable).
• Partial decriminalization  typically refers to no prison sentence but may still entail an arrest and/or criminal record.
• Legalization  refers to full legal adult-use of marijuana in private spaces for both medical and non-medical reasons (though public use is still subject to sanctions).

By our count, at the end of 2010, roughly only one-third of Americans lived in a jurisdiction with full or partial decriminalization laws. By April 2021,  over 75%  of people in the United States lived in a jurisdiction that has passed some form of decriminalization or legalization.

Not all decriminalization is created equal

These numbers can mask the fact that not all decriminalization initiatives are created equal and that some forms of decriminalization do not ensure significant reduction in criminal justice encounters for marijuana users. Despite the growth in the number of states that have fully legalized cannabis for all forms of adult use (17 states, the District of Colombia and three U.S. territories), residents of 14 states (29% of the U.S. population) continue to be barred from using cannabis lawfully even for medical purposes and many others are subjected to a patchwork of decriminalization statutes, which can differ from a city to city if full decriminalization is not adopted on statewide basis.

Decriminalization statutes vary across a number of factors that can affect the impact and outcomes of these reforms. For example, these laws differ on what conduct is decriminalized (amounts and location of possession), who qualifies for relief (e.g., first-time offenses only, probationers), whether possession is a civil or criminal infraction and when fines are imposed and at what level. Finally, how these laws are applied and enforced by law enforcement and other official actors can vary. Here are some examples of these differences:

1. Fines  – In North Dakota, a partially decriminalized state, the maximum penalty for less than 0.5 ounce of marijuana is $1,000, more than the average monthly rent for a 2-bedroom apartment. While in Minnesota, North Dakota’s neighbor, a person in possession of 1.49 ounces of marijuana or less would be fined only $250. In additional to nationwide differences, there is often considerable in-state variation. For example, some cities in Ohio, such as Athens and Cleveland, have no fines associated with marijuana possession of 200g or less. However, the same act of marijuana possession in a neighboring town may be subject to the state’s partial decriminalization law which imposes up to a $250 fine and up to 30 days in jail for possession of 100g of marijuana or less.

Beyond the costs of fines, there are often serious, even criminal, repercussions for those who cannot pay. Unpaid civil fines may trigger a misdemeanor offense or a driver’s license suspension. For partially decriminalized jurisdictions that treat possession as a minor criminal infraction, unpaid fines could result in jail time.

2. Decriminalized for whom?  There are often exceptions codified into decriminalization reforms excluding people with marijuana-related or other types of criminal records. Many decriminalization laws stipulate that marijuana possession is only decriminalized for first or second-time offenses. Those who are found guilty of a second offense or third offense face steeper fines and potential imprisonment. Some jurisdictions, like North Carolina, still leave the possibility of a suspended jail sentence on the table for a first-time offense.

In addition, persons on probation or parole may still risk a supervision violation for marijuana use in states that have enacted marijuana reform. Nationally, roughly one fourth of new state prison admissions are for technical violations like failing a drug test or missing a check-in meeting. The exact number of those admitted to prison for marijuana violations is unknown, but marijuana use can still have dire criminal consequences when states continue to allow for marijuana violations to trigger a prison sentence or lengthier probation terms.

Jurisdictions that treat marijuana as a criminal infraction can result in severe  consequences for documented and undocumented immigrants  alike. Marijuana arrests can lead to deportation and, for many marijuana convictions, can trigger a mandatory sentence in an immigration prison.

3. Enforcement loopholes  – A jurisdiction’s laws on paper do not always reveal how the law is enforced in practice. New York state, for example, first decriminalized in 1977 mandating that possession of 25 grams of cannabis or less would result in no jail time and a maximum $100 fine  if  possession was out of public view. Yet, individuals who were asked by law enforcement to empty their pockets were now subject to harsher punishment and the possibility of jail time for public view possession. According to the Bronx Defenders, law enforcement frequently used this loophole to make unlawful arrests and by their count, these unlawful arrests accounted for  40% of all possession arrests . In 2019, New York passed a legislation closing this loophole and later legalized adult-use, but  half a million people were arrested  in New York for marijuana possession between 1997 and 2010. New York is not the only state to stipulate that possession must be out of public view, leaving the door open for this loophole to be exploited by other jurisdictions.

In addition, in Ohio and some other decriminalization jurisdictions, statutes criminalizing possession of drug paraphernalia remained in force resulting in arrests and prosecution for having rolling papers or a pipe along with a small amount of marijuana.  In some settings, police could and would continue to criminally enforce marijuana use through these paraphernalia prohibitions.

4. Civil or criminal infraction –  In some decriminalized jurisdictions, marijuana possession is treated as a civil offense akin to a traffic ticket. However, in many others, such as Missouri and North Carolina, possession is still treated as a criminal offense and subjects an individual to a formal criminal record. While a first-time offense may not result in a jail or prison sentence, those caught and convicted will possess a misdemeanor conviction on their record, are subjected to a possible 30-day stay in jail, and are burdened with the downstream consequences of a criminal record.

Marijuana and arrests in the 21st century

Decriminalization is a step forward, but does not ensure significant reduction in criminal justice encounters for marijuana users and the varied criminal justice-related impacts of marijuana criminalization. While arrest rates declined precipitously in states that have legalized cannabis, arrests in decriminalized states experienced more modest declines. According to a  report from the ACLU , marijuana possession arrest rates hit lows of 25 per 100,000 in 2018 amongst states that legalized, down from 174 per 100,000 for these same states in 2010. However, amongst decriminalization states, arrest rates were cut only by approximately one-third, from 301 to 216 per 100,000 residents. The modest declines in arrest in decriminalization states come as no surprise given the considerable variation and caveats in decriminalization statutes. Since 2010, overall arrests in the U.S. have declined by roughly one-sixth. While these declines are meaningful, they are not keeping up with the pace of the promise of decriminalization reform.

Over the past 30 years, America’s support for the policies enacted during the War on Drugs has slowly dissipated and more than half of all Americans support “recategorizing drug offenses from felonies to civil offenses” ( 55% ). While decriminalizing statutes and legalization efforts are a welcome step forward in the marijuana arena at the state level, without federal action on decriminalization or legalization, Americans will continue to live under a patchwork of disparate measures leaving some exposed to the continued dangers of arrest and imprisonment for cannabis offenses while others accumulate wealth from a legal cannabis industry.

To request access tp our full dataset of marijuana decriminalization statutes, email [email protected] . 

Marijuana Decriminalization in all States

How it works

The government should legalize marijuana on the federal use due to the multifaceted health, economic, and criminal benefits now outweigh the outdated downsides of use. Many researchers have come to the conclusion of outdated research not being correct. “One function of government is to protect citizens from harm, whether it is from foreign enemies or from internal causes such as poisonous food or contaminated water.” Researchers believe that legalizing marijuana will not help the people only harm them and the government should not legalize it because it could potentially hurt people.

Some of the health benefits coming from this plant is and is not limited to, people with post traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, eating disorders, and it also helps with cancer patients by relieving some of their pain. Medical marijuana dispensaries are spreading around the United States Of America, many states have legalized marijuana due to there being more positive research than negative. Some side effects of marijuana would be altered senses, altered change of time, changes in mood, impaired body movement, impaired memory. There are many different ways to use marijuana when it comes to the medical use you can smoke it, drink it, and eat it (edibles). Also a recent study done in Nevada since marijuana was legalized a year ago, alcoholism, and driving under the influence of alcohol has dropped.

Now going into how it would help the government if they were to legalize it, more money would come in if it were to be legalized they could make money by opening dispensaries and tax on it. Colorado has collected over one hundred thirty five million dollars in taxes and fees on medical and recreational marijuana. A study done by investopedia, says that if marijuana was to be legalized the government could bring in more than one hundred thirty one billion dollars in tax revenue by 2025. It also means more jobs and income for households. Also many people would invest their money into medical marijuana nurseries and dispensaries because they would know it would be a good market, many people and places are looking for that investment opportunity. Also another thing with the legalization of marijuana would not only be to make money but then again to save money, the government spends three point six billion dollars on funds to enforce locking people up for the use of marijuana or selling it since it is not legal.

Many charges against people would be dropped after medical and or recreational is legalized which means clearing up space in jails and prisons, which would mean more money being saved by saving those spots for more serious charges. A more bigger picture for other people would be if marijuana was legalized there would be more people driving under the influence and doing things that could go wrong or hurt themselves or others. A US study shows since marijuana was legalized in US states well some at least violent crimes have slowed down and dropped. Since the 1970’s more than 20 states have decriminalized marijuana. One major thing you hear with the use of marijuana is it is a “gateway” drug which means it opens the doors to many other drugs that do not have many good or positive attributes.

There are not many negative views on the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana. According to a recent study it showed only nine percent of people who try marijuana get addicted to it. A big reason many people are worried about the legalization of marijuana would be driving while intoxicated and hurting the people in the care or others. Others think that it should not be legalized because the side effects can change so much about the person when he or she is not sober. People in a study done by researchers has shown that people think marijuana use is worse than alcohol and tobacco use. People tend to say it is a myth that marijuana does not have any good in it some say the same thing but vise-versa. Sixty two percent of people say that marijuana should be legalized and decriminalized.

So in all marijuana should be legalized and decriminalized in all states and that all states should support it.

Cite this page

Marijuana decriminalization in all states. (2020, Mar 24). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/

"Marijuana decriminalization in all states." PapersOwl.com , 24 Mar 2020, https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Marijuana decriminalization in all states . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/ [Accessed: 9 Sep. 2024]

"Marijuana decriminalization in all states." PapersOwl.com, Mar 24, 2020. Accessed September 9, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/

"Marijuana decriminalization in all states," PapersOwl.com , 24-Mar-2020. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/. [Accessed: 9-Sep-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Marijuana decriminalization in all states . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/marijuana-decriminalization-in-all-states/ [Accessed: 9-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Undergraduate
• High School
• Architecture
• American History
• Asian History
• Antique Literature
• American Literature
• Asian Literature
• Classic English Literature
• World Literature
• Creative Writing
• Linguistics
• Criminal Justice
• Legal Issues
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Political Science
• World Affairs
• African-American Studies
• East European Studies
• Latin-American Studies
• Native-American Studies
• West European Studies
• Family and Consumer Science
• Social Issues
• Women and Gender Studies
• Social Work
• Natural Sciences
• Pharmacology
• Earth science
• Agriculture
• Agricultural Studies
• Computer Science
• IT Management
• Mathematics
• Investments
• Engineering and Technology
• Engineering
• Aeronautics
• Medicine and Health
• Alternative Medicine
• Communications and Media
• Advertising
• Communication Strategies
• Public Relations
• Educational Theories
• Teacher's Career
• Chicago/Turabian
• Company Analysis
• Education Theories
• Shakespeare
• Canadian Studies
• Food Safety
• Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition
• Movie Review
• Admission Essay
• Annotated Bibliography
• Application Essay
• Article Critique

Article Review

• Article Writing
• Book Review
• Business Plan
• Business Proposal
• Capstone Project
• Cover Letter
• Creative Essay
• Dissertation
• Dissertation - Abstract
• Dissertation - Conclusion
• Dissertation - Discussion
• Dissertation - Hypothesis
• Dissertation - Introduction
• Dissertation - Literature
• Dissertation - Methodology
• Dissertation - Results
• GCSE Coursework
• Grant Proposal
• Marketing Plan
• Multiple Choice Quiz
• Personal Statement
• Power Point Presentation
• Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes
• Questionnaire
• Reaction Paper

Research Paper

• Research Proposal
• SWOT analysis
• Thesis Paper
• Online Quiz
• Literature Review
• Movie Analysis
• Statistics problem
• Math Problem
• All papers examples
• How It Works
• Money Back Policy
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• We Are Hiring

The Decriminalization of Marijuana, Research Paper Example

Pages: 11

Words: 3030

Hire a Writer for Custom Research Paper

Use 10% Off Discount: "custom10" in 1 Click 👇

You are free to use it as an inspiration or a source for your own work.

The aim of this paper is to outline the rationale for the legalization of marijuana and thus to make a case for its consequent decriminalization. In this regard, the attention is paid to the benefits of using marijuana, effects marijuana has on the population, cons of legalization and the main arguments in favor of legalization. It is argued that the legalization of marijuana is not the precondition for its further spread rather a rational choice due to the existing discourse on the subject matter.

Key words : marijuana, legalization, drug abuse, decriminalization, pain relief.

The Decriminalization of Marijuana

In the history of human development, various aspects of human behavior had different evaluation in terms of social approval and criminal status. Although some actions like harming another human being are universally unlawful, the others are more controversial in their nature and social perception. One of such controversial issues is the matter of the legalization of marijuana in the USA. The aim of this paper is to make the case for the decriminalization of marijuana. In this regard, the attention is paid to the benefits of using marijuana, effects marijuana has on the population, cons of legalization and finally the benefits of legalization.

Benefits of using marijuana

The main rationale for the legalization of the medical marijuana in California and other twenty-two states was conditioned by the medical properties of the herb and its painkilling effect on the body (Beau, 2012). Consequently, the main argument in favor of the legalization of all marijuana is due to the benefits it has for the health of people using it. Recently, due to the increase of the interest to marijuana and its potential legalization, various medical examinations and research was conducted on its effect on various illnesses. First of all, it can be used for treatment of such an eye disease as glaucoma, because it can reduce the inner pressure in the eye, which can slow the development of the disease (Morgan, 2010).

According to one of the recent findings, smoking marijuana can reverse the impact of the smoking tobacco. It is argued that because in order to smoke marijuana the user has to make a deep breath it increases the lung capacity and the consequent functioning of the lung (Ruschmann, 2009). Marijuana also demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of epileptic seizures, although it was just tested on rats, preventing them from seizures for up to ten hours. The main explanation for this ability is conditioned by the ability of cannabinoids to bind the brain cells that are responsible for epileptic attacks (Russo, 2013).

Findings of another research demonstrated that marijuana is successful in stopping cancer from spreading by eliminating functionality of the gene Id-1, which is responsible for copying itself and entering the healthy cells, thus spreading the cancer (Russo, 2013). Further tests of breast cancer treatment demonstrated that after the sessions of marijuana treatment, the spread of cancer decreased. Thus, some researchers suggest that the use of marijuana might be able to prevent cancer or at least decrease the chances of its appearance. Other diseases that marijuana can slow down or ease include Dravet’s Syndrome, Alzheimer disease, multiple sclerosis. It also eases the effects of hepatitis C treatment, improving its effectiveness. It also relieves various pains including severe migraines and bone pains (Russo, 2013).

All mentioned above therapeutic benefits of marijuana for people with mentioned above diseases can be covered by the legalization of medical marijuana. So, the question is why it should be legalized for the rest of the population? What would be the benefits for other people to use it? First of all, the primary benefit of occasional use of marijuana is that it has a relaxing and calming effect on the user. In this regard, it relieves the body of stress and any type of pain. In terms of brain function, it numbs the highly active functions and lets the brain rest from the problems of the day (Russo, 2013). In this regard, the main function of marijuana for the users is that it relieves the stress that causes more cardio-vascular disorders than any other factor in our contemporary life.

For people that always under pressure marijuana could provide an alternative to such way of stress-relief as alcohol or other drugs. Although other drugs are illegal, it does not stop people from using them. So, legal marijuana would be a healthier alternative to the other two options. It would hurt the liver like alcohol and it would not damage the entire body like heavy drugs, which usually excite the body and nervous system instead of relaxing and calming it down like marijuana does (Russo, 2013). Furthermore, small doses of marijuana demonstrated to be effective in eliminating the symptoms of anxiety and depression. In terms of its painkilling effect, it is healthier than constant taking of the painkillers, mainly because cannabinoids affect the brain directly, while painkillers go through blood, and their remnants of their degradation accumulate in the liver damaging its normal function (Beau, 2012). Overall, the benefits for the user are tremendous so far it is a small dose and it is not a constant consumption that turns into a habit.

Effects marijuana has on the population

According to the international UN statistics, 158.8 million or 3.8% of world’s population uses marijuana (Morgan, 2010). In the US, in one of the surveys 94 million admitted trying it at least once. In 2007, 6.7% in the age group 12-17 were using marijuana (Beau, 2012). According to the US federal statistics, in the last twenty years domestic production of marijuana has increased from 1,000 metric ton in 1981 to 10,000 in 2006. Other statistics demonstrate that various criminal actions involved marijuana, in 2005, more than 242,000 visits to emergency involved marijuana (Ruschmann, 2009). Marijuana is also the second most popular substance after alcohol (Morgan, 2010).

This statistics demonstrates a few trends in marijuana’s effect on population. From one perspective, it becomes obvious that being illegal a certain part of the population considered it to be harmless to try. It also suggests that just as alcohol it can have both relaxing and harmful effect if abused. This suggests the second trend that just as any opiate if abused marijuana can result in criminal activity since it can blur one’s thinking and perception of deviance in their actions (Beau, 2012). However, this refers to the cases when it is abused just as alcohol is involved in various criminal actions when abused, yet it is legal for every full adult.

The main effect of marijuana on population is that if it is used in normal doses and not as habitual pattern, it would actually decrease the number conflicts among people and could pacify the population due to aforementioned properties of marijuana. It could eventually become a substitution for an alcohol, and it would definitely be a more socially-convenient substitution (Ruschmann, 2009). The main rationale for this argument is that the use and the abuse of alcohol results in a different behavior than the use and the abuse of marijuana. Under the influence of big dose of alcohol, people tend to become aggressive and defensive while the use of marijuana has the opposite effect. It relaxes people and calms them down. Thus, it can prevent the conflict from happening. On the other hand, the abuse of marijuana as any substance can result in abuse the potential development of addiction (Beau, 2012). In this regard, the impact of marijuana on population would be the development of another source of addiction and an element to destabilize the law and order balance in the society.

The problem of marijuana’s effect on population is dual because like with alcohol it largely depends on the way it is used and for which purposes. In this regard, people who intend to abuse marijuana will still buy it from their dealers illegally. People who will want to try it still will be buying from the same dealers. Those who will want to abuse this substance are not stopped by law at present, and the legalization of marijuana will only make it legal. On the other hand, the rest of the population will be given a choice to try marijuana by buying it in a safe and legal way or not to try it at all.

In terms of this discourse, it is also essential to outline that irrespective of the predominant fear that the legalization of marijuana will increase the crime rate and would stimulate further drug abuse that is a very unlike scenario to develop. The main rationale is that the population that lives a healthy life and considered any artificial stimulators to be irrelevant in their life will not care about marijuana legal or not (Morgan, 2010). Categories of the American society that are predisposition to commit a crime will commit it under the influence of marijuana legal or not or under the influence of alcohol or heavier drugs. At the end of the day, it is not the substance that trigger deviant behavior but an individual that makes a decision and who is convinced that committing a crime is his only option. Thus, the legalization of marijuana would not be the main source of crime escalation in the nearest future (Ruschmann, 2009). Consequently, the impact of marijuana on the population is that it will simply make it easier and safer to obtain rather than keep ordinary users in the grey zone between legal and illegal.

The cons of the legalization of marijuana

As any controversial issue, the legalization of marijuana has various arguments against it. First of all, it is often argued that the state should be involved in the dissemination of addictive substances, since it could be viewed as a state promotion of immoral actions harming one’s health and clarity of mind (Beau, 2012). This argument is often conditioned by the religious moral perception of the functionality of the state as a guardian of moral behavior of the people and it should discourage the use of soft drugs instead of encouraging it through the legalization.

The next argument is based on the escalation approach to the abuse of drugs. In this regard, antagonists of legalization argue that the legalization of marijuana would encourage people to use it resulting in a greater number of people developing addictions to this drug (Ruschmann, 2009). The mass consumption of the legalized marijuana is believed to trigger a greater demand for the hard drugs as a result of strengthening addiction to marijuana. Consequently, from the antagonists’ perspective, it is not only the state would encourage people to become drug addicts but also it would increase the demand for drug dealers and would assist drug cartels in making money in their business. Thus, the federal money spent on fighting cartels would be used for nothing (Kenneth and Xueyan, 2009). In this regard, it is also suggested that legalization and public support of marijuana would result in the encouragement of children to take drugs at a very young age since one of the drugs is legal than the others should not be too bad (Morgan, 2010).

Another widespread suggestion is that the legalization of marijuana would increase the crime rate and stimulate people to conduct deviant behavior (Beau, 2012). However, as it was outlined above deviation is conditioned by personal moral code and personal motivations rather than the use of marijuana itself. In terms of the economic perspective of the matter, it is also argued that marijuana should not be legalized because it would create an undesired demand for which the national market would be able to satisfy. This would require creating more marijuana farms and using more fertile lands for growing marijuana. In other words, by legalizing marijuana, the land which could be used for growing food would be used for growing marijuana which is more expensive than tomatoes, for instance (Morgan, 2010).

It is also outlined that the abuse of marijuana can result in severe health problems. It can result in long-term memory loss, learning difficulties, potential lung infection, increase in the heart rate and also it is assumed that it results in the permanent brain damage (Morgan, 2010).  Thus, in a long run, the legalization of marijuana would result in deterioration of population’s health level and would eventually result in weaker and more ill the next generation of American citizens (Ruschmann, 2009). Consequently, is argued that the state should be interested in securing health and well-being of its people and not encourage them to make choices harming their lives.

All mentioned above antagonistic arguments are based on morality and duties of the state and the assumption that by legalizing marijuana all people would just rush to take and abuse it. This rationale does not take into consideration the diversity of people and motivations for their actions. They also do not take into account that people who want to take marijuana will take it legally or not, and those who do not want to will not. It is the matter of free will. From a psychological perspective, the forbidden item is usually the most desired and keeping marijuana outside the legal framework makes it even more desirable particularly for teenagers who would get this way or the other. The only difference would be that they could get it safely when they are of the right age, or they could get involved with the wrong people and end up in the criminal circles (Morgan, 2010). Except for this refutation of the cons, there are also other pros which need to be taken into account.

Pros for the legalization of marijuana

First of all, the legalization of marijuana would make the way of its obtaining safer for the users, who would not be robbed or killed in the wrong places. It would take the market of marijuana from the hands of drug cartels and would locate it is the local or federal governmental hand (Beau, 2012). In this regard, when the market would be controlled by the state, the drug cartels would not be able to gain profit from marijuana on the black market, which is the major source of their income. It would also discourage them from growing their marijuana on various locations in the national parks across the US (Kenneth and Xueyan, 2009). In other words, when the demand of the national market would be satisfied by the state, growing marijuana for the black market and transport it abroad would be simply unprofitable. The main benefit for the local, state and federal government is that legalization would result in the opportunity to put taxes on marijuana. It would become an immense source of funding the local budgets which can be used for further improvement of the law enforcement activities (Kenneth and Xueyan, 2009). Another important aspect in this context is that the efforts and the funds spent on the law enforcement in their fight against marijuana dealing and trafficking across the country could be redirected in a different sphere. They could be used for fighting gang crime or homicide investigations instead of chasing marijuana producers and spending time on distinguishing medical marijuana producers from the illegal ones (Ruschmann, 2009).

In terms of the existing marijuana stores that sell medical marijuana, the legalization of marijuana would provide them also with a greater security. First of all, their employees would not be stopped and detained by police all the time. They will not have to keep all their money in cash in safes on the premises, being a mark for robbery. The point is that banks are reluctant to accept money that had anything to do with marijuana business, since according to the federal law marijuana is illegal and they do not want to endanger their funds (Beau, 2012). Thus, it is the illegal status of marijuana that encourages crime in this situation.

In terms of the perspective of the private businesses, they are ready for the legalization of marijuana and the boost it would make to marijuana-related sectors of industry. In this regard, medical marijuana legalization in California triggered the development of companies specializing in seed and land preparation for marijuana cultivation, machines for its collection and processing, various types of smoking devices, supporting items like T-shirts and key holders and many other things reacted to it (Kenneth  and Xueyan, 2009). The main rationale in this context is that legalization would boost this sector of the economy, stimulating further employment. From the global perspective, legalization would also stimulate marijuana tourism like it did in Amsterdam (Beau, 2012).

The benefit of legalization for ordinary people is that they are given a freedom of choice about whether they want to use or marijuana or not. They do not need to find some deviant places in order to buy marijuana for recreational use (Morgan, 2010). Also, people that use medical marijuana by prescription will not have to go to isolated places away from the main streets were medical marijuana shops are allowed to be located by the current state law. It would be much more convenient for them to obtain it and use for the medical purposes.

In fact, from all mentioned above it can be concluded that there is no strong evidence against the legalization of marijuana. At the first glance it may seem that legalization of a drug is against the law and order paradigm; however, the soft category of marijuana make it the same as alcohol and tobacco leaving its use to the choice of an individual rather than the matter of governmental discussions and regulations. The legalization of marijuana would benefit everyone from the government to the ordinary recreational user. On the other hand, the continuation of the argument and polarization of society in terms of this argument make no good to any side. It only keeps medical marijuana producers in the grey zone and enforces the local authorities to distinguish between these shades of grey and try to explain to the taxpayers what the difference is.

Beau, K. (2012). Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kenneth, C. and Xueyan Z. (2009). Economic and Marijuana: Consumption, Pricing and Legalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Morgan, K. (2010). Legalizing Marijuana . Edina, MN: ABDO Publishing.

Ruschmann, P. (2009). Legalizing Marijuana . New York, NY: Chelsea House.

Russo, E. (2013). Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic

Potential. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Integrative Healing Press.

Stuck with your Research Paper?

Get in touch with one of our experts for instant help!

The Free Market Prioritizes Efficiency, Essay Example

Antidepressant Use in Pregnancy, Article Review Example

Time is precious

don’t waste it!

Plagiarism-free guarantee

Privacy guarantee

Secure checkout

Money back guarantee

Related Research Paper Samples & Examples

The risk of teenagers smoking, research paper example.

Words: 3102

Impacts on Patients and Healthcare Workers in Canada, Research Paper Example

Pages: 7

Words: 1839

Death by Neurological Criteria, Research Paper Example

Words: 2028

Ethical Considerations in End-Of-Life Care, Research Paper Example

Pages: 5

Words: 1391

Ethical Dilemmas in Brain Death, Research Paper Example

Words: 2005

Politics of Difference and the Case of School Uniforms, Research Paper Example

Pages: 2

Words: 631

Essay Service Examples Law Marijuana Legalization

The Arguments For and Against the Decriminalisation of Cannabis

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

• Adda, J., McConnell, B. & Rasul, I., 2014. Crime and the Depenalization of Cannabis Possession:Evidence from a Policing Experiment, s.l.: s.n.
• Dragone, D., Prarolo, G., Vanin, P. & Zanella, G., 2017. Crime and the Legalization of Recreational Marijuana, s.l.: IZA DP No. 10522.
• Drug Policy Alliance, 2018. Marijuana Decriminalization and Legalization. s.l., s.n.
• Miron, J. A., 2008. The Effect of Marijuana Decriminalization on the Budgets of Massachusetts Governments. With a Discussion of Decriminalization’s Effect on Marijuana Use.
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Governors Highway Safety Association, & the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, 2017. Impact of the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana on the DWI system, Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration..
• National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2019. Marijuana. [Online] Available at: www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana#mjetracts[Accessed 12 December 2019].
• Oshi, D. C. et al., 2018. Gender differences in the factors associated with early age of initiation of cannabis use in Jamaica. Journal of Substance Use.
• Speranza, K., 2011. The Effects of Massachusetts’ Decriminalization of Marijuana Law on Use Patterns, s.l.: s.n.

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

• Cannabis/Medical Marijuana
• Marijuana Legalization
• Perspective

The author Perry Daniel Strausbaugh (March 21, 1886 - May 3, 1965) was an American botanist and...

We’re in a momentous time where a plant has attracted the attention of the American people. The...

Legalising marijuana use has long been a controversial debate worldwide. With recent legalisation...

In 2012 a bill was passed to make the use of medical marijuana legal. To obtain the drug though,...

The legalization and regulation of cannabis across the United States market marks a significant...

The battle over legalizing marijuana has been debated for years in the United States. The...

There is no denying that there are many debates globally about marijuana. By now, you should...

From its first national regulation in the United States with the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, to its...

• College Students

“Critical thinking, that is, the capacity and disposition to evaluate propositions and be moved by...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!