Pubdate: Mon, 09 Jul 2012
Source: Wanganui Chronicle (New Zealand)
Copyright: 2012 APN News & Media Ltd
Contact: http://www.wanganuichronicle.co.nz/info/letters/
Website: http://www.wanganuichronicle.co.nz/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4336
Author: James Penn
Note: James Penn is deputy head boy at Wanganui High School and was a 
member of the New Zealand team that competed in the World School 
Debating Championships.

HIGH TIME TO LEGALISE MARIJUANA

It is somewhat amusing that the most prominent crusader of a cause 
which receives its most support from the teenage to early 30s age 
group, or Gen Y, at New Zealand's latest election was a 71-year-old Don Brash.

Decriminalisation of marijuana is a cause which is enjoying growing 
support from all age groups, certainly. Interaction with my peers 
about this issue and virtually all polls indicate that the 
decriminalisation of marijuana, cannabis or the substance which is 
known by any number of terms, is an initiative which is endorsed by 
youth most of all.

It is a shame that the constituency that Brash relied upon most was 
Epsom, which comprised of a disproportionately elderly and socially 
conservative group of voters relative to the rest of the country. 
This meant that Brash had to backpedal significantly from his initial 
advocacy of this policy in order to receive enough support to have 
John Banks elected as the member of parliament for Epsom, giving ACT, 
and thus Brash, the chance of having additional list MPs in Parliament.

A poll in the US by the well-respected Gallup indicated that the two 
groups which had the lowest support for the legalisation (admittedly 
a slightly different policy, but very similar nonetheless) of 
marijuana were conservatives and the 65-plus age group, from which 
legalisation had just 34 and 31 per cent support, respectively. By 
contrast liberals and the 18-29 age group displayed the greatest 
support, with 69 and 62 per cent.

I would imagine that if statistics could be provided for under-18s on 
this issue, the support would be even higher. It is clear that as the 
population ages and more of my age group become eligible to vote the 
legalisation of marijuana will become a more important and 
politically satiable policy to advance.

I personally have never smoked cannabis and I imagine I probably 
never will; but I believe steadfastly that I have no right to impose 
my own values and my own opinions regarding drug use upon others.

This is a view which, when I discuss it with many of my peers at 
school, is often shared. By all accounts, cannabis is not a very 
addictive drug, far less so than tobacco, and individuals are well 
aware of the harms it causes to their bodies. But there are also 
benefits to enjoy with the use of these drugs, just as some people 
enjoy smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol.

It is not for me to decide for others whether the benefits or the 
costs of marijuana use are greater, because that is an entirely 
subjective decision to make. From a standpoint of individual liberty, 
it seems to make sense to legalise marijuana.

But even if we conceded that the use of cannabis had universally 
negative outcomes, the criminalisation of the substance does little 
or nothing to reduce its use and only exacerbates its harms.

This year's United Nations World Drug Report was what piqued my 
interest and spurred me to write a column on the issue. It identified 
Australia and New Zealand as having some of the highest rates of 
marijuana use in the world.

Estimated annual worldwide usage of cannabis is between 2.5 and 5 per 
cent, while the report stated it is between 9.1 and 14.6 per cent in 
New Zealand. That's higher than in countries where the use of 
cannabis is decriminalised, such as the Netherlands and Ecuador.

Arguing that cannabis is a gateway drug and legalising it will 
heighten that role ignores the fact that criminalisation does little 
to reduce its use.

Attempts to enforce these laws, which costs the Government around 
$100 million a year, are largely futile.

The more pertinent issue is what happens as a by-product of this 
ineffective criminalisation. Maintaining the illegal status of 
marijuana does not make it disappear, but the individuals or 
organisations who now produce and supply it are always going to be 
those willing to break the law and risk the consequences of getting 
caught doing so.

Obviously, these people and groups are, for the most part, gang 
members, who have little interest in ensuring the safety of what they 
are selling. If you can't pay for your drugs on time, you get beaten 
up and physically forced to pay it.

By contrast, in the world of legalisation, there are regulations 
ensuring safe and not pernicious substances are in the cannabis, 
there is a greater willingness from those who do get addicted to seek 
help as they are no longer branded the law-breaking scum of society, 
and the consequences of any issues you have with the supplier are 
just like any other product where recourse is sought through the hand 
of the law rather than the fist of the gang member.

Cannabis itself seldom causes fathomless and incomprehensible harm to 
the user, but the war on cannabis does exactly that.

More of the leaders of our world are starting to consider the 
indisputable futility of current anti-cannabis laws and the 
indefensible and pervasive effect they have on freely acting users. 
This is comforting, and the increasing support for decriminalisation 
from younger generations means that political barriers will be 
unlikely to stand in the way of such an principally proper and 
practically sensible law change for much longer.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom