Prohibition of the Cannabis Sativa Plant

The prohibition of the cannabis sativa plant, more commonly known as marijuana, is an anomaly in the criminal code of the United States. A poll initiated by Time Magazine provides a microcosm of American opinion on the issue of marijuana prohibition (2002). The poll ascertained that while only 34% wanted cannabis completely legalized (a figure that had doubled since 1986), an overwhelming majority of 72% wanted it decriminalized, and an even greater majority of 80% found it acceptable to distribute the herb for medicinal purposes. In other words, most participants wanted marijuana illegal in theory and law, but legal in practice, a modus operandi that is operating ostentatiously in Dutch coffee shops.

Not only is contemporary drug law seen as supererogatory by a considerable portion of the national population, but it is also astringently and excessively enforced. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Crime in the United States, the nation’s most reputable crime index, police make approximately 700,000 arrests annually for marijuana infractions, which nearly equals the number of arrests made for crack cocaine, powder cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, ecstasy and all other illicit narcotics combined (2002). Needless to say, such rigorous enforcement is expensive; enforcing marijuana statutes costs the government between $10-15 billion a year in direct costs (2005).

Why is the criminal justice system dissipating precious resources to enforce jurisprudential regulations that are plagued with dissent amongst the American populace? One popular argument is the notion of marijuana being a “gateway” drug. A gateway drug is a substance that within itself is not overly threatening, but its use could lead a person down a slippery slope to more dangerous drug use. If marijuana became legalized, it is reasonable to assume that its use would increase, and with more people using marijuana, there would be more people victimized by the presumed gateway effect of marijuana. A subsequent escalation in more dangerous drug use would be the ultimate effect, following this line of reasoning.

However, the legitimacy of the gateway theory of marijuana has been subject to criticism in the scientific community. The government has long promoted the concept of marijuana functioning as a catalyst to more dangerous drug use, often resorting to deceptive rhetoric, frequently reiterating the fact that marijuana users are 85 times more likely than non-marijuana users to try cocaine (2000). Although true, this statistic is misleading. It was derived by dividing the percentage of marijuana users who have tried cocaine (17%) by the percentage of cocaine users who have never used marijuana (0.2%). The resulting statistic, therefore, results not because the gateway effect victimizes so many marijuana users, but because so many cocaine users have tried marijuana. Since cocaine is a more serous drug, most of its users are extremely likely to have tried marijuana, a less serious, more popular substance. This statistic ignores the fact that most people that try marijuana never go on to try cocaine (1995). Legalizing marijuana could very likely have the opposite effect the government suggests, serving not as a gateway to more hazardous s drugs, but as a safe alternative to more dangerous drugs, resulting in a diminution in the use of malignant, illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine, and highly addictive prescription drugs like Xanex, Morphine and Codine.

Scientific studies conducted over the past few decades have established that neither marijuana nor tetrahydrocannibol, cannabis’ active ingredient, is physically addictive. However, marijuana consumption, like any substance or activity, regardless of legality, could lead to psychological addiction. Those who frequently and perpetually