Throughout history there has never been a society without drugs. From our ancestors use of psychotropic drugs like marijuana and mushrooms, to wine and ales in the Greek and Roman Empires, and to our modern use of alcoholic spirits, to expect a “Drug Free America” is unrealistic. There has always been drug usage and probably always will be. It seems to fulfill a fundamental need in the human experience (Miron, 2000). This paper‘s aim is to compare our “War on Drugs” to Prohibition in the 1920’s.
The Harm Reduction Movement began a claim that marijuana could be smoked for medicinal purposes (IBH, 2009, p.3). This campaign for medical marijuana essentially began a “pro-pot movement” which in turn could be related to the rise in use of illegal drugs, such as marijuana, in the early 1990’s (IBH, 2009, p.4). This pro-medical marijuana position became very politically acceptable since it began to portray America as facing a “jail vs. treatment” choice in relation to its’ opinion on marijuana, specifically medical marijuana (IBH, 2009, p.4). The rise in popularity of the pro-pot/Harm Reduction Movement affected the rise in the use of illegal drugs in the early
Huffman contrasts the two substances, describing the effects of synthetic cannabinoids as " anecdotal, and comes from things like visits to emergency rooms." Alternately, marijuana has been thoroughly researched. He believes "marijuana should be legalized, since its effects are known. 'It should be sold only to people 21 and older. It should be heavily, heavily taxed'" (Schone & Schecter,
Most ads for alcohol have drink responsible written on them but it is in small writing in the corner. Alcohol companies aren’t the only to blame, liquor store ads showing prices and giving specials encourages youth to buy the alcohol because it is in the prize range of young people who can scab a couple of bucks off their parents. It is even easier to get alcohol; most kids these days just wait out the front of the liquor store and pay some stranger to get it for
The comparison of the textbook’s coverage consisted of the how over the course of the 19th century reformers worked to have complete prohibition. It also spoke about the corruption among law enforcement agents was widespread and organized crime began and grew to be an illegitimate business. Agree/Disagree with Author’s Premise? Why or Why Not? I do agree with the author’s premise because Americans did not stop drinking following ratification of the 18th Amendment.
It will give me ideas of what can be used as a con regarding medical marijuana. In this article, the author speaks about California, Arizona, and several other states have recently legalized medical marijuana. He also states clearly what his goal is. That goal is to demonstrate that even if one grants the opponents of legalization many of their contentious assumptions, the federal government is still obligated to take several specific steps toward the legalization of medical marijuana. He defends this claim against a variety of objections, including the claims: that marijuana is unsafe, that marijuana cannot be adequately tested or produced as a drug, that the availability of synthetic THC makes marijuana superfluous, and especially that legalizing medical marijuana will increase recreational use by 'sending the wrong message.'
Although known as the “gateway drug”, the report stated that marijuana use did not lead to the possible addiction of other hardcore drugs such as heroin or cocaine. Even though this report and others like it, brought forth non damaging conclusions regarding this controversial drug, the process to make this drug illegal continued to roll on. The Narcotics Control Act of 1956, Conventions on Narcotic Drugs, and the creation of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs helped keep prohibition of marijuana at the forefront of the political system. President Nixon’s term was full of “War on Drugs” anthems that were designed to help the growing epidemic in the country. The President appeared on television shows and radio broadcasts to push his pledge against drugs.
Actions taken by the government to wipe out marijuana in the U.S. were similar to ways in which they tried to eliminate enemies in war, for example, “Some anti-marijuana campaigns take on the characteristics of military operations. The spraying of the herbicide paraquat, first used on Mexican marijuana crops in 1975, is reminiscent of Vietnam-style chemical warfare.” (Offbeat Marijuana p. 48). This compared marijuana users to the people of oppressed third-world countries, and may have been one of
Growing up in the 1970’s and 1980’s I recall Nancy Reagan’s famous slogan addressing the use of all drugs, “Just say no.” Everyone I knew wanted to experiment with marijuana that much more because of Nancy Reagan’s famous/infamous motto. Much because our government insisted we could not use marijuana we insisted we could. In addition, Steves’ article argues there
Weed was pretty much made illegal to try to prosecute Mexicans that came over in our country many years ago before when Mexicans were the main users of the stuff. There is a lot more to this story, but that’s a whole other paper that I could write. Did you know that the primary crop on George Washington’s plantation was hemp (marijuana plant.) He was not the only president either. Oh and that reminds me, what were the declaration of independence and the constitution originally written on?