To the editors:
On Dec. 3, the Maroon published an opinion column that praised the failure of Proposition 19 in California, which would have effectively legalized the use of cannabis in the state. As the executive director of Loyola’s chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, I felt it necessary to weigh in on the issue of legalization versus decriminalization.
Decriminalization removes criminal penalties from cannabis sale, use, cultivation, and/or other activities ascribed by law. The term decriminalization is a bit misleading, because it does not mean there is no penalty or that the criminal and taboo stigmas have been removed. It means that government authorities no longer wish to exhaust time and resources to jail otherwise law-abiding citizens for getting high in their leisure time.
Over 30 percent of the U.S. lives under some form of cannabis decriminalization, but this has not been followed by decreases in marijuana arrests. When discussing cannabis prohibition and how to end it, remember those who are in jail. Even if you do not use cannabis, you are not excused from taking a stance. In 2009, 858,408 American citizens were arrested for cannabis, which marked record high results (one-fourth of which were 18-24 years of age).
Decriminalization ignores many problems that affect cannabis users that can only be remedied by legalization. The prohibition of marijuana and other substances have provided a large and lucrative market for organized crime. Though decriminialization allows for law-abiding citizens to cultivate limited amounts of plants, it does not take production out of the hands of criminals. Prohibition essentially is the end of control and regulation.
Drug cartels in Mexico have executed 5,612 of their own countrymen from 2004-2008 to protect a lucrative market handed to them by the U.S. and other countries involved in the war on drugs. At this point, safety and health standards are nonexistent. Street dealers are not bound by law to check ID’s. Cartels are neither interested in industrial potentials of hemp, nor in taxing cannabis to improve communities.
The United States is one of the few countries that does not allow commercial hemp production (yes, we import all of our hemp even though we have some of the most fertile farm land in the world). Proposition 19 would have allowed for both the commercial use and taxation of cannabis.
Decriminalization does not stop the deaths. Cultivators and users are still subject to death and imprisonment. The problems that stem from cannabis are not caused by the plant at all, but from allowing it to become the official currency of the black market. Decriminalization has caused users to be content with the status quo. During the days and weeks leading up to the midterm election, there was an unexpected movement among young people and cannabis users that believed Proposition 19 should be opposed, because it did not go far enough.
Others simply did not think it was in the best interest of smokers. To put it bluntly, that is ignorant and a self-centered view. The column belittled and portrayed a grave injustice as just another one of California’s “crazy ideas.” Proposition 19 would have been a major victory for cannabis users, and for justice all over the world. The issue is much deeper than just getting high.
Josh Warren
Political science sophomore
