The Emotional vs The Rational in Marijuana Law Reform

My first time at the New Jersey State House, I was in the cafeteria having a conversation about the medical marijuana testimony I had just listened to when an Assemblywoman overheard what we were talking about. She asked me about the state of the medical marijuana bill and then seemed pleased when I told her it had passed the committee. We started talking about the testimony and she mentioned something crucial; one of the most important jobs for legislators during committee hearings is to distinguish between rational, fact-based statements and emotional, fear-based ones.  

This is very apparent in marijuana-related hearings. Regardless of whether we look at a medical hearing in New Jersey or a legalization hearing in California, the opposition’s main argument remains the same. They talk about “the children.” It is one of the few arguments they have left. The reason it is still effective is because so many people let the fear of the unknown frighten them into assuming the worst. The idea of “protecting the children” allows people to take the easy way out and frees them from the burden of having to check the facts or form a rational opinion.

People who would like to keep marijuana illegal often talk about the negative repercussions of legalization that medical and social usage would have on children. Little of this is backed up by fact or experience. Here are a few emotional arguments that I’ve heard used to keep marijuana illegal, followed by a rational response:

Emotional: "My kid could interpret legalization as an OK to try pot?"

Rational: Alcohol, tobacco, and coffee are all things that we teach our children to avoid using until they are grown up. Marijuana should be no exception. History has shown us that decriminalization and legalization do not cause use rates to rise. In fact, according to this article, in Amsterdam, “The number of adolescent cannabis users peaked when the cannabis was distributed through an underground market during the late 1960s and early 1970s.”     

Emotional: “Marijuana is a gateway drug and will only be a stepping stone to harder drugs.”

Rational: This has been consistently proven false. Cigarettes, alcohol and even 2% milk and roast beef have been used or ingested by many hard drug users. This does not mean the substance itself caused them to move on to harder drugs.  

In fact, the illegality of marijuana may be making this problem worse. Because it can only be purchased on the black market, all those who want or need to use marijuana must become involved in the black market. Once that connection is made, it is easier for dealers to advance the use of hard drugs. Amsterdam is a perfect illustration here.  Their drug laws were made to distinguish between hard and soft drugs for this reason, and it worked. They have lower hard drug use rates then we do in America. Heroin use rates are 1.4% in the United States compared to .4% in Amsterdam. 

Emotional: "Marijuana decriminalization and regulation would make it easier for children to obtain the marijuana."

Rational: This one always blows my mind. How could something that’s sold on the black market (which doesn't check IDs) possibly be harder to get than in a regulated market where the stores have an incentive to check IDs? How could causing our children to buy something that is grown, transported, and sold secretively be a better choice than letting the growers and sellers be regulated and inspected? 

I am under twenty-one years old and I guarantee you it is much easier for people my age and younger to purchase marijuana than it is to purchase alcohol. Almost any high school student in America can have pot delivered to their house any time of the day or night. Alcohol, on the other hand, requires knowing someone who is of age. This was backed up by a study done by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA). This study shows teens have an easier time buying marijuana than beer. 

Furthermore, the Netherlands Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport released a report stating, "The rate of [cannabis] use among young people in the US is much higher than in the Netherlands, and Great Britain and Ireland also have relatively larger numbers of school students who use cannabis."

It is clear that those who claim legalization will harm our youth are victims of scare tactics, and that they work to perpetuate these ideas which have been embedded in them. In fact, it is possible they are hurting the same children they intend to protect by distorting the facts and keeping this widely used substance on the black market. 

The observation the Assemblywomen shared with me that day in the State House cafeteria – that one must distinguish between rational, fact-based statements and emotional, fear-based ones – is important to remember. It is easy to get caught up in emotional arguments, especially about kids. Such arguments can scare us into thinking it is best not to take a “risk” and this can prevent us from moving on to further research. Anyone who does adequate research on this subject will see that loosening up our painfully strict marijuana laws will only be an asset to the future of our young people.