Pubdate: Wed, 15 Jan 2014
Source: Reporter, The (PA)
Copyright: 2014 The Reporter
Contact:  http://www.thereporteronline.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3468
Note: Washington Post editorial

ON MARIJUANA, JUST SAY 'SLOW'

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, D, has said he's "not much in favor"
of following Colorado and Washington state down the path of
legalizing marijuana sales. His opposition probably seals the fate of
the major pro-pot bills introduced in the state legislature this
year. Still, momentum for legalization is building, and the
term-limited Mr. O'Malley will be gone in a year. So here's a
question for cannabis-loving lawmakers in Annapolis, led by Senate
President Thomas V. Mike Miller, D-Calvert: What's the rush?

The arguments for and against legalizing, regulating and taxing retail
marijuana have been around for years, but a few things have changed.
One is public opinion, which has tilted clearly toward more lenient
treatment of people who possess small amounts of pot and, more
gradually, outright legalization.

That, and the supposed lure of tens of millions of dollars in
sales-tax revenue for state treasuries, led to new laws in Colorado,
where legal retail sales of marijuana began Jan. 1, and Washington,
where they will begin later this year. Over time, those two states
should provide answers, or at least significant new data, that shed
light on the real costs and benefits of allowing adults to buy pot
openly and legally.

Right now, the cost-benefit equation is mainly a matter of conjecture.
Studies to date, in the 20 or so states where legal medical marijuana
is available, are of limited use.

Will the new laws in Colorado and Washington lead to increased use?
More marijuana in schools? Spiking rates of addiction and treatment?
Widespread "smurfing" by people who go from store to store buying
1-ounce bags (the per purchase limit) and selling them on the black
market?

Perhaps most important, will the wide availability of marijuana in
those two states prompt people to drink more alcohol, especially when
they drive, or less? And will there be more stoned driving, which
itself is dangerous? The answers to those questions, critical for
public health and safety, are unknown.

Given the stakes - the already-staggering carnage on the nation's
roadways caused by drunk (and stoned) drivers, and the risk of more of
the same - that's a powerful argument in favor of gathering more
information before rushing headlong toward legalization.

A couple of generations of Americans have come of age amid relatively
widespread use of pot; many are inured to its effects. It is true that
THC, marijuana's active ingredient, is generally less harmful and
debilitating than alcohol. Still, it's foolish to overlook the effects
of long-term use, and the Drug Enforcement Administration reports that
potency levels are higher than ever.

THC use has been linked to memory problems, impaired thinking -
including diminished IQs - and weakened immune systems. For those who
start using the drug as youngsters and keep at it for years, there is
a risk of addiction and an increased risk that it will lead to other
drugs. Mr. O'Malley cited some of those reasons in opposing
legalization.

It makes sense to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of
marijuana by imposing modest fines rather than jail terms. Overly
harsh sanctions have filled prisons with users who are left with
criminal records; that's irrational. It's a more dubious proposition
to populate downtown street corners with marijuana stores. The wise
course for states considering legalization, including Maryland, is to
regard Colorado and Washington as data-generating laboratories. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D