The legalization of marijuana is a problem? Essay

Question 1: The Problem, Its Essence and Victims

The problem herein is the legalization of marijuana. The legalization of marijuana is a problem because the use of the same drug exposes one to addiction and the impairment mental and bodily functions. The use of marijuana readily co-occurs with memory loss, immune system deficiencies, cancer, birth defects and heart diseases. The entire public is bound to be harmed by this problem, since the effects of marijuana use and abuse are far reaching to pervade both users and non-users of marijuana. For instance, while the simple-minded may think that the dangers of marijuana will accost only its users, the truth has it that marijuana use readily and inevitably attracts crime, violence and social disintegration. The government will also incur unforeseen expenses as it disburses more funds to the healthcare sector, for the treatment of marijuana-triggered conditions.

Question 2:

The cause of these problems is the very nature of marijuana itself. Marijuana smoke contains 50- 70% more carcinogenic hydrocarbons, compared to tobacco smoke. Similarly, the fact that a single puff of marijuana smoke significantly alters chemical composition of the brain is a matter that is amenable to psychological complications and poor health. For the most part, the party that is culpable for blame is the people who voted for the decriminalization of marijuana. Given that the majority voted in favor of the legislation of marijuana as is disclosed by the BBC, there was nothing much policy makers and legislators could do. Partly, human rights caucuses such as ACLU are guilty of championing for the legislation of marijuana without sincerely informing the public about the dangers of the unprescribed use of marijuana. Likewise, other research organizations that falsely assert that there are no side effects of marijuana are to blame for the failure to be truthful (BBC, 1).

Question 3:

To address this problem, it will be important to conscientize the public towards the pitfalls that come with the use of marijuana. It is from this juncture that the public can make informed decision on the matter. This idea is tenable because positive change emanates from a point of knowledge and self-resolution. Self-resolution will be important for all stakeholders herein. For instance, while parents will see the need to reinforce positive influence on their children concerning this problem, legislators may see the need to push for abrogation of the clause that legalized marijuana. From this point, the conscientized public may vote wisely.

Others may propose the maintenance of status quo, citing personal discretion as a bulwark against the dangers of marijuana. However, this may be untenable since decriminalization of marijuana will lead to increased presence of marijuana in the public. This will make it easier for the drug to infiltrate teenagers and minors whose strength of personal discretion is still fledgling.

Question 4:

The only drawback to the proposal advanced above is the incurring of additional expenses during the campaigns to conscientize the public on the dangers of marijuana. Secondly, these additional expenses may be exacerbated by the move to subject the matter to a second referendum. However, compared to the expenses that may be incurred when tackling the demerits of marijuana use, these aforementioned expenses may be negligible.

Question 5:

Individual bhang users, organizations that traffic or sell marijuana and research organizations affiliated to marijuana dealers and ACLU may object to this proposal. The same may object to the answers discussed above, simply because they are benefiting from marijuana dealership or they are too addicted to marijuana to face the harsh but sobering reality on marijuana.

Works Cited

BBC. Marijuana decriminalized in Washington State. BBC News, Dec. 6th, 2012.

Retrieved From: Print