Pubdate: Sun, 20 May 2007
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Page: CM - 2 of the Chronicle Magazine
Copyright: 2007 Hearst Communications Inc.
Contact:  http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/388
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n504/a09.html
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n505/a02.html
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n505/a06.html
Author: Robert Sharpe

POT -- PRO AND CON

If health outcomes determined drug laws instead of cultural norms,
marijuana would be legal.

Unlike alcohol, marijuana has never been shown to cause an overdose
death, nor does it share the addictive properties of tobacco. Like any
drug, marijuana can be harmful if abused, but jail cells are
inappropriate as health interventions and ineffective as deterrents.
The first marijuana laws were enacted in response to Mexican migration
during the early 1900s, despite opposition from the American Medical
Association.

Dire warnings that marijuana inspires homicidal rages have been
counterproductive at best.

White Americans did not even begin to smoke pot until a soon-to-be
entrenched government bureaucracy began funding reefer-madness
propaganda. By raiding voter-approved medical marijuana providers in
California, the very same Bush administration that claims illicit drug
use funds terrorism is forcing cancer and AIDS patients into the hands
of street dealers.

Apparently marijuana prohibition is more important than protecting the
country from terrorism.

Robert Sharpe

Policy analyst

Common Sense for Drug Policy

Washington, D.C.