Paul Armentano, the Deputy Director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) (check out their blog here), is an expert on marijuana policy, health, and pharmacology. He has served as a consultant for Health Canada, the Canadian Public Health Association, and the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts.
As a guest on yesterdays Freedom Watch, Armentano starts by discussing the potential treatment and prevention of certain cancers through the medical use of marijuana:
ARMENTANO:Things like THC and several other unique properties [of cannabis] actually have the ability to selectively target cancer cells and kill those cells. [This is] sort of the Holy Grail for cancer research; and frustratingly the Federal government has not funded appropriately clinical trials in humans on this sort of work, but we’ve know that marijuana has had these effects on animals now for three decades.
Although President Obama has been more lenient on Federal laws prohibiting marijuana use when compared to the previous administration, the DEA is still raiding certain third-party vendors in states like California, who have authorized doctors to prescribe marijuana to certain patients.
ARMENTANO:What is very interesting with these raids is that no criminal charges are ever filed. The Federal government comes in, they kick down some doors, they seize some merchandise, they seize cash, they seize computers, and then they leave.
According to Armentano, the U.S. government first got involved the “marijuana prohibition business” all the way back in 1937,
ARMENTANO:Now when you look at the actual transcripts of those hearings we laugh at them – even though they were the foundation of marijuana prohibition. The government’s argument at the time was that if you use marijuana you would go insane and be inspired to commit acts of violence and murder.
Nowadays the government doesn’t so much propagate the “Reefer Madness” fad. This is maybe because anyone who has ever been exposed to marijuana, or those who do it, knows simply through their everyday experience alone that it doesn’t cause people to be more violent. Instead the government now tries to perpetuate the myth that marijuana has worse health risks than tobacco or alcohol, which is simply not true.
NAPOLITANO: Which is more harmful statistically: the excessive use of marijuana or the excessive use of alcohol?
ARMENTANO:Well if we are looking at either the harm caused by the drug to the individual or if we are looking at the harm done to society, clearly alcohol is the far more detrimental substance.
According to Armentano, despite all the governments prohibition and propaganda surrounding cannabis 51% of those polled by Rasmussen Reports believed alcohol to be more dangerous than cannabis. Only 19% of those respondents said marijuana was.
ARMENTANO: The public understands this issue. They have it right. It is the law that has it wrong.
NAPOLITANO:Do you think we will ever get to the point where the government will let us make our own choices? Even if they are bad choices, even if they are stupid choices, but they are our own choices about what we put in our body? As long as whatever we put in doesn’t harm somebody else?
ARMENTANO: Let’s certainly hope so. I mean that is one of the main reasons why this prohibition of marijuana is so detrimental. The federal government has drawn an arbitrary line that says adults can put certain substances in their body and then other substances they cannot. And that line is not based on science – it is not based on potential dangers to the user or potential dangers to society.As I noted, it is an arbitrary line. Yet we have arrested in this country over 20 million Americans since 1965 on marijuana offenses. Almost 90% of those arrested were arrested on simple possession only. Yet if we go back to 1965 we will see that marijuana is more prevalent today then it was then, that young people have easier access to marijuana than they did then, that marijuana is more potent today then it was then, and that there is more violence associated with the illegal drug trafficking of marijuana today then it was then.
We have literally spent tens of billions of dollars and ruined millions of people’s personal and professional lives. But we have not in anyway disrupted the flow of marijuana to this country nor have we dissuaded anyone from using marijuana in this country. It is time to acknowledge this reality and regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol.
To add just a bit of my own commentary on this issue: I agree with Armentano, but I think the drawbacks of having marijuana prohibition – especially in a supposed free society – can be probed even deeper and even more philosophically.
Even though prohibition has already empirically proven itself to be more harmful to society than helpful, shouldn’t we also be supportive of marijuana legalization simply due to the principles of freedom and self-ownership?
A free society should be obligated to respect the individuals decision on what does and doesn’t go into his or her body, as long as it doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s rights. If this holds true for a persons actions, then it is a victimless crime, and the person should not be punished for pursuing their own sense of happiness. If this individual right is not respected, then we have to ask ourselves as a society what side of freedom do we really stand on?
