George Sevy

Marijuana in the U.S.A

Within the last week the morals of an entire nation have changed. With two states
legalizing the full recreational use of marijuana it leaves millions of people asking, Is this an
appropriate step for the well-being of our country?. Depending on the extremely one sided
opinions on the matter, who is to say what the right choice is. The only choice is to outweigh
the pros and cons of the idea of the pot high, and whether its influence can affect our country
as a whole.
Much time has passed since the full legality of this issue has come into question. In the
nineteen-thirties Harry Anslinger instigated an approach to the instant denial of the integration
of the drug in normal society, while at the time the hemp plant was one of the most profitable
natural commodities of an industrial world. With the help of propaganda within movies, the
news, and every ascertainable form of media, the idea of smoking weed was quickly
relinquished to the pits of every other illicit substance; unhelpful, and coincidental detrimental
to the social structure. So what has changed? Is it the ability for growers to procreate
enhanced strains of the plant? Has the norm for cultivation of plant species for produce
entirely changed across the planet? Or rather, is it a new instigated realization that this plant
has become ingrained in human nature and we should allow nature to take its course.
The usefulness of marijuana has been known throughout centuries, and not necessarily
for its psychoactive properties. The actual plant, (when grown without the intent of producing
THC resins), can be produced as hemp, the most durable soft fiber on the face of the planet. So
why shouldnt such a profitable plant; in the same realm as cotton or corn, not be used for
personal, industrial, or simply natural needs? The idea of using the plant for economic values
might seem far-fetched due to the fact that it is almost entirely being grown, distributed, and
used as a recreational drug, but the potential is there. Within the same process as industrial
hemp, these movements in favor of the recreational use of weed are instigating regulations to
taxably sell the drug simply the same way as alcohol to boost a states economy, if not on a
federal level.
This brings into question the use of pot among the younger population of America. If
we are to sell this substance with the same strict regulations to curve use to the demographic
under the age of 21, what is to stop those users from continuing their habit. From many points
of view, the availability of drugs under strict regulation are much harder to come across than
the illegal products on the street. If it is easier to buy heroin than alcohol for an eighteen year
old, doesnt it make sense to take marijuana, (which is already in widespread use among teens
and college students), and put it in a scenario that takes it off the streets into a reputable
business? This would also to a certain degree effect the violent outcomes of the drug wars
down south, where a large percentage of the weed in America is imported. If these cartels no
longer have the ability to sell to our country when we have the capability to produce and sell in
our own domain it could potentially wipe out any ideas for relying on a foreign country for the
supply, leaving our demands in our hands.
The main reason why such a drastic movement was even put into motion is the idea of
medical marijuana to bypass federal law. Although there are only two states with legalized use,
currently eighteen states allow medical use to patients, with a few of these trying to change
there legalization reform laws as well. When you look at it the idea is quite introverted. If it is
known that marijuana provides an alternative natural relief for ailments such as glaucoma,
multiple sclerosis, and cancer, even when in the eyes of the federal government it is a schedule
1 drug which is supposed to have no medical value. So which side is right? Should we let an
already rampant drug be available to every adult in the country, or should we still try to teach
that the use of the drug is ok, as long as you are infirmed. The one sided belief on this matter
seems to be strictly split by those who have used the drug and those that havent. The users
attest to full medical benefit, but can instantaneously be cast out as a stoner whose theories
seem to be less valid, such is the case with any drug user. Those opposed can be seen as
ignorant, for not weighing the pros of legalization because society has told us for decades what
a terrible substance this is. As with any argument no side is the correct side, but the argument
in question still needs an answer.
For millions of pot enthusiasts this legalization was a blow to the structure that stood for this
country for nearly a century. Are we taking drastic steps to allow another psychoactive
substance into our midst, or are we simply joining a worldwide recognition that this plant has
been ingrained in human life for hundreds of years? No matter how you look at it the issue will
never be completely solved. Legalizing something that you have always discouraged does not
go down well with the large population, but perhaps these recent steps in favor of marijuana
are enough to turn people on this new path. I guess only time will tell if these radical
experiments in Colorado and Washington will change these peoples beliefs, and the beliefs of a
nation.