Wikipedia

User:Am6015/Sandbox

< User:Am6015

Definition

edit

Marijuana’s current legal status promotes inequality and the current U.S. federal prohibition of marijuana is a product of inequalities within the American system of governance. Information from various academics, newspapers, and governmental officials is used to display exactly how the legal status of marijuana endorses inequality. Statistics portraying the race of those arrested for arrest rates and those who actually use the drug vastly differ. How arrest are conducted show the exploitation of ambiguous laws by police: inequality of governmental authority over the public. Medical reports show the ambiguity in marijuana studies, while the support for prohibition only looks to the reports revealing the detrimental effects.

Explanation

edit

Social inequality refers to the disparity between groups in society, particularly in social class.[1] Marijuana illegality portrays the present inequalities within American society. In New York City and California, the primary race of those arrested for possession of marijuana was Black, followed by Hispanic and Whites.[2][3] Yet governmental studies show that nationwide, Whites use marijuana more than any other race group in almost all categories surveyed. [4] In California., cities where Blacks make up the minority of the population , Blacks are predominately the majority arrested.[5] In NYC, Blacks and Hispanic are each about 25% of the population, while making up almost 90% of those arrested for Marijuana.[6] If the arrest were to follow the statistical data, the arrest would match the population of users, and not be distorted to particular minorities.

In New York City , Marijuana is decriminalized to the extent where possessing small amounts are punishable by a $100 fine. [7] Having Marijuana in the presence of the public is a criminal offense, and this is the cause for the 430,000 arrest since 1997 in NYC. [8] To attain such arrest, the individuals guilty of possession of Marijuana must be “burning” or showing the plant out in the open. NYC police, “stop and frisk” Blacks and Hispanics at a rate disproportionate to the city’s demographics. [9] “Stop and Frisks” are allowed under the notion that police must check citizens who may be carrying weapons. Harry Levine, professor of Sociology at Queens College, who conducted research on NYC’s marijuana arrest, reveals, during the stops, police are thought to ask if the individual have anything they should reveal to the officer. Upon this question, the suspect reveals the drug to the officer, in public, entailing their arrest, rather than a fine. [10]

Background

edit

Marijuana entered the public arena in the 1930’s with the optional provision to the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act proposed in 1932 and the Congress enacted Marihuana Tax Act in 1937.[11] As states begun to adopt some form of marijuana restrictions, the general public was largely ignorant to the drug’s effects and appearance. “Reefer Madness” was a film to prevent watchers from using the drug, for it caused psychosis, attempts at rape, car accidents, and murder. [12] In the film, a party where young adults are smoking marijuana cigarettes has jazz music playing in the background. At the time, jazz was associated with the Harlem Renaissance and the Black musicians who many consider to create the foundation for the music genre.[13]

In 1931, the Bureau of Narcotics released the statement “The abuse of the drug is noted among the Latin-American or Spanish-speaking population. The sale of cannabis cigarettes occurs to a considerable degree in States along the Mexican border and in cities of the Southwest and West, as well as in New York, and, in fact, wherever there are settlements of Latin Americans” and by 1936 a British periodical stated “The time has come for light to be thrown on an astonishing situation which is likely to become a serious menace to the jazz world on two continents. This concerns the "reefer" or dope habit which is spreading rapidly amongst musicians, and has been going on comparatively secretly for a number of years.”[14]

Other media outlets released data that focused on the Mexican drug sellers, who lured the American youth to using the drug. In 1933, Detective L. E. Bowery of the Wichita Police Department stated” habitual smoking is at present almost exclusively confined to young persons among the white people. It is interesting to note that the habit has recently spread among the negroes and that they are known to be trafficking in it.”[15] At the hearings regarding the Marijuana Tax Act, an excerpt stating :“We find then that Colorado reports that the Mexican population there cultivates on an average of 2 to 3 tons of the weed annually. This the Mexicans make Into cigarettes, which they sell at two for 25 cents, mostly to white school students.”[16] reveals the notion that the drug was peddled by other races to the “white American school student”. This statement also places blame on the entire Mexican population, portraying them all as drug dealers. Such statements in a pre-Civil Rights Movement era placed blame on the racial minorities, who were segregated from Whites, [17] furthering the notion of their second class status, due to selling drugs and causing havoc under the drugs influence. A reporter notes that marijuana becomes an issue only when it reaches the middle class, previously ignored in its ghetto presence. [18]


Scientific claims made by professional in light of prohibition were made without sound scientific evidence. The cannabinoid receptor system was discovered in the late 1980s,[19] and since then studies like the “Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing The Science Base” have challenged the claims towards marijuana, specifically the addictive properties, causation of using other substances, and revealing the cannabinoid receptors influence on pain, memory and appetite. [20] The studies in support of prohibition have since then been reassessed the Tulane University , Rhesus monkey experiment finding marijuana to cause dead brain cells was given causation due to “The monkeys were suffocating! Three to five minutes of oxygen deprivation causes brain damage - ‘dead brain cells.’ [21]

Controversy

edit

Anti-Prohibition

edit

Currently, the popular debate in regards to marijuana prohibition is based on the number of arrest for marijuana. As of 2009, police arrested approximately 860,000 persons for Marijuana; of those charged, approximately 90% were charged with possession. [22] Opponents of prohibition state the claims made to support prohibition are myths, unsupported by scientific fact. “Exposing Marijuana Myths: A Review of the Scientific Evidence”, a study by two professors of the City University of New York, focuses on popular myths which are proven false by assessing various studies and research on marijuana.[23] The study states that the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), funds studies mainly seeking contribute to the “War on Drugs”. Furthermore, “Dozens of claims of toxicity appear in its documents, despite the existence of scores of scientific studies refuting their validity. At the same time, studies that fail to find serious toxicity are ignored.”

A report by Dr. Jeffrey Miron, visiting professor of economics at Harvard University, finds the legalization of marijuana to “produce combined savings and tax revenues of between $10 billion and $14 billion per year.”[24] The same report is endorsed by over 530 economist, many who are distinguished in the field, Milton Friedman , signed the open letter to then President Bush and other officials to produce a debate in regards to marijuana, under the assumption that, “We believe such a debate will favor a regime in which marijuana is legal but taxed and regulated like other goods." [25]

Former high ranking members of California police departments admit prohibition to be a failure[26] :

”After decades of marijuana prohibition, with millions of arrests and billions of dollars spent, the results are in. Prohibition is a disaster.”
”Anyone in California who wants marijuana can get marijuana. Massive law enforcement efforts have only made cartels rich, and black market violence hurts innocent people and their children caught in the crossfire between criminals. Teenagers get marijuana more easily than beer, because drug dealers don't ask for proof of age.”

They also state that the U.S. has endorses the harshest penalties for marijuana, yet continues to have the highest rate of marijuana use in the world.

Others state that because marijuana is the U.S’s largest cash crop ($35.8 billion) and the prohibition of the drug does little to deter use or purchase, by treating marijuana like, “tobacco and alcohol by legalizing and reaping a tax windfall from it, while controlling production and distribution to better restrict use by teenagers.”[27] Studies show that marijuana, although prohibited, is easily accessible to high school students, “ With little variation, every year about 85% consider marijuana “fairly easy” or “very easy” to obtain.”[28]


Scientific evidence supports the medicinal properties found in marijuana. A study conducted by the Complutense University of Madrid found that the properties found in marijuana promotes the death of brain cancer cells. The same study found cannbinoids to have anticancer in mice and humans. Those who received THC treatment did not suffer any toxic effects. [29] A study conducted by Columbia University on HIV/ AIDs patients found that those who inhaled marijuana four times a day saw increases in food intake, without increased discomfort and cognitive impairment. [30]

In September, 2010, the notion that marijuana should be prohibited to due to the “gateway hypothesis”: marijuana leads to using stronger illicit drugs, was proven to be overblown by a University of New Hampshire study conducted by two professors of sociology. The study found the use of other illicit drugs was due to life factors, like employment status and stress, and the strongest predictor, their race/ethnicity. Particularly, Non-Hispanic Whites show the greatest odds for other illicit substance abuse. [31] The researchers conclude for U.S drug policymakers to review their stance on the “drug problem”.

Pro-Prohibition

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ceelbas/research/socialinequality
  2. ^ http://www.nyclu.org/files/MARIJUANA-ARREST-CRUSADE_Final.pdf
  3. ^ http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ArrestingBlacks.pdf
  4. ^ http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k7NSDUH/tabs/Sect1peTabs1to46.htm#Tab1.25B
  5. ^ http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ArrestingBlacks.pdf
  6. ^ http://dragon.soc.qc.cuny.edu/Staff/levine/Epidemic-of-Pot-Arrests-in-NYC-Aug-09.pdf
  7. ^ http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article221.htm
  8. ^ http://dragon.soc.qc.cuny.edu/Staff/levine/Epidemic-of-Pot-Arrests-in-NYC-Aug-09.pdf
  9. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/05/13/nyregion/13frisk-gr.html?ref=nyregion
  10. ^ http://dragon.soc.qc.cuny.edu/Staff/levine/Epidemic-of-Pot-Arrests-in-NYC-Aug-09.pdf
  11. ^ http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/vlr/vlr3.htm
  12. ^ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028346/
  13. ^ http://www.1920s-fashion-and-music.com/Harlem-Renaissance-music.html
  14. ^ http://www.ukcia.org/research/abel/12.php
  15. ^ http://www.ukcia.org/research/abel/12.php
  16. ^ http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBRARY/studies/vlr/vlr3.htm
  17. ^ http://www.teachersdomain.org/resource/osi04.soc.ush.civil.mendez/
  18. ^ New York Times, Feb. 15, 1970. Quoting from Abel, Marihuana
  19. ^ http://www.alternet.org/drugs/60959/?page=entire
  20. ^ http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/iom/IOMReport.htm
  21. ^ http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/conspiracy_conclusion.htm
  22. ^ http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock
  23. ^ http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/general/mjmyth/exposing_index_1095.html
  24. ^ http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
  25. ^ http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
  26. ^ http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2010-10-20-editorial20_ST1_N.htm
  27. ^ http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003482836_marijuana18.html
  28. ^ http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/download-materials/MJ_ProhibFacts092008.pdf
  29. ^ Salazar M, Carracedo A, Salanueva IJ, et al. (May 2009). "Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death through stimulation of ER stress in human glioma cells". The Journal of Clinical Investigation 119 (5): 1359–72.
  30. ^ Haney M, Gunderson EW, Rabkin J, et al. (August 2007). "Dronabinol and marijuana in HIV-positive marijuana smokers. Caloric intake, mood, and sleep". Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 45 (5): 545–54.
  31. ^ http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/51/3/244.full
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Am6015/Sandbox&oldid=427573744"