Marijuana Conflict Essay, Research Paper
Marijuana Conflict
In investigating the matter of California s proposition 215 and Arizona s proposition 200, I found out of many important issues that need to be discussed before making the decision of legalizing marijuana completely. In the run-up to November s elections, opponents of California s proposition 215 and Arizona s proposition, both of which allow doctors to recommend or prescribe currently illegal drugs drove home one basic point; These ballot initiatives were, in the words of Clinton and Barry McCaffery, a stalking horse for legalization. (McCaffery 39).
Proposition 200 promises a broader impact than California s initiative. It enables doctors to prescribe any schedule I drug a category that includes marijuana, heroin, LSD, MDMA, and other illegal substances. The point man behind Arizona s drug medicalization, precention, and control act of 1996 was phoenix area millionaire Jhon sperling, the head of the Apollo group, says his interest in the issue is purely public policy. (Sperling 12)
California s proposition 215 is without a doubt a not well thought out idea. The thought that there is no age restriction, even children can be legally permitted to use marijuana without parental consent. (MacCaffery 17)
The National Institute of health conducted an extensive study on the medical use of marijuana is not a safe or more effective treatment than marinol or other FDA approved drugs for people with AIDS, Cancer, or glaucoma. Researchers have not found a beneficial way to describe the use of marijuana. California s proposit
Organizers of both efforts remain emphatic that the proposition covers only legitimate defensible medical use. Bill Zimmerman Head of the California medical rights association said; all marijuana use is medical-except for kids .He also stated unabiguosly on CNN s crossfire That he is appossed to legalization of drugs and that the laws provision apply only to patients under the care of certified physicians. (Zimmerman 17)
More difficult questions revolve around the interaction of the new statutes with federal drug laws. Under federal law, it remains illegal to manufacture, use, possess, or distribute any schedule I drug, including marijuana. So even patients following doctors orders and compiling with state laws are violating federal law.
The position of doctors is more complicated still. While doctors are already prohibited from prescribing schedule I drugs, the U.S Drug Enforcement Administration also license Physicians to prescribe controlled substances such as morphine. The DEA carefully tracks the use of such drugs and exercise powerful oversight in that area. (Zimmerman 12)
In conclusion, I would like to ask a question to all the people that think this is a very big issue in the United States; What would be the most important and most adequate decision to make? Will legalizing marijuana be such a good idea as to not legalizing marijuana?