Abstract
The paper analyzes the pros and cons of the marijuana decriminalization debate. The paper briefly examines both sides of the argument and concludes that there is compelling evidence arguing against the continued decriminalization of marijuana. Specifically, the paper looks at the resources which can be diverted to more important issues, and also at the way that decriminalizing marijuana could make the difficult tasks of police officers considerably easier. The paper concludes that that marijuana is less problematic than alcohol and over-the-counter drugs and that decriminalization would be beneficial.

From the Paper
"There can be little question that marijuana use has polarized the American in ways that would have been unanticipated even a few years ago. Not least of all, there is a battle ongoing between those who feel the decriminalization of marijuana is simply a step forward and one more means of allocating police resources more efficiently, and those who feel that rampant marijuana use - and certainly its decriminalization - is one more instance of America's moral decay. The following paper will review the arguments against marijuana decriminalization and the arguments in favor of marijuana decriminalization. As should become apparent, there are a number of compelling and trenchant arguments against continuing the prohibition against a drug that causes far less havoc each and every year than do alcohol and/or over-the-counter prescription drugs. With that in mind, it is to a discussion of this thorny issue that this paper now turns."

Tags:marijuana, use, law

Abstract
This paper argues in favor of the decriminalization of marijuana, citing it as a good idea inasmuch as such a measure will eliminate costly and ineffective laws. Additionally, the paper notes that legalized marijuana will allow for a more judicious allocation of funds, will undermine the black market, and will not precipitate the increased consumption of the narcotic by young people. The paper also states that there is simply no merit to the argument that marijuana is a gate-way drug to harder substances.

From the Paper
"All though some disagree, the decriminalization of Marijuana is a good idea inasmuch as such a measure will eliminate costly and ineffective laws, will allow for a more judicious allocation of funds, will undermine the black market, and will not (if the Netherlands is any example) precipitate the increased consumption of the narcotic by young people. As well, there is simply no merit to the argument that marijuana is a gate-way drug to harder substances. The following paper will elaborate on these points while simultaneously advancing (and rebutting) the criticisms of those who wish to see marijuana remain illegal."

Tags:decriminalization, marijuana, america

Abstract
This paper looks at the reasons for decriminalization of marijuana, citing studies which show it would not increase use of the drug, and would not lead to the use of hard drugs. It also cites the attitutes of other countries around the world on possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use.

Tags:decriminalization

Abstract
The paper first addresses the economic benefits of legalizing marijuana that involve the revenue the government could earn through taxing marijuana users, instead of paying an enormous amount for enforcing marijuana laws. The paper then argues that the decriminalization of marijuana will lead to a direct reduction in crime, and a drastic reduction in the prison population, and the need for taxpayers to foot the bill for housing criminals. The paper turns to the benefits of medicinal marijuana and argues against the standard arguments used against legalizing marijuana. Finally, the paper looks at the Netherlands, where they treat the drug user before incarcerating him, and save all the costs of incarceration.

Outline:
The Economics of Marijuana
Marijuana and the Criminal Justice System
Medicinal Marijuana
Arguments Against Legalization
Other Countries

From the Paper
"A controversial and ongoing topic which seems to be slowly but surely making strides towards liberalization is the legalization of marijuana issue. This drug has a pacifying effect, and does not encourage criminal behavior. In fact, the only reason that marijuana use causes criminal behavior is because marijuana has been deemed illegal. It does not in any shape or form lead to increased violence. It is also highly medicinal in its effect, and is a natural substance. Thus, there is an aura of non-threat to the drug in this day and age, and since so much crime and violence is drug related, there is a sense that marijuana legalization could have a pacifying effect, and even be a mitigating factor against crime, as well as physical and emotional suffering."

Tags:crime, prison, incarceration, taxpayers, addiction, pot

From the Paper
"The topic of decriminalizing some classes of drugs, particularly marijuana, has been turning up in the news again regularly. It had been a topic of considerable political debate when President Jimmy Carter endorsed decriminalization of marijuana in 1977, but the idea quickly lost respectability when President Ronald Reagan renewed the "war on drugs" in 1982. The issue briefly surfaced again a few years ago when former-Surgeon General Jocelyn Elder speculated that the costs of keeping marijuana illegal may far exceed the benefits. This research examines the moral, economic and health costs and benefits associated with criminalizing marijuana use. It argues that de-criminalizing the use of marijuana has merit on all three grounds.

Hemp, the basic plant that is marijuana, was at one time ... "

Abstract
The paper argues that the United States has dedicated billions of dollars, thousands of lives and countless yards of prison space to a war on marijuana that fails logic. The paper aims to demonstrate the irrational nature of marijuana's current legal status by discussing the failure of the war on drugs in general, the waste of taxpayer resources and the medical benefits of marijuana. The paper contends that the current legal status of marijuana is irrational, inhumane and essentially obstructive to the improvement of America's current and dire economic situation.

From the Paper
"It would also cost a great deal less to spend taxpayer resources--yielded from the legal sale of marijuana no less--on rehabilitation facilities rather than the lengthy process of criminal prosecution and incarceration. Connecting these practices to a substance which legitimately has not proven to bear a direct connection to criminal behavior, which has never been empirically demonstrated to have chemically addictive factors and which in its pure form has few of the chemically harmful ingredients that are found in tobacco products is irrational. That is has been connected to closely to objections of the moral variety is counterintuitive to the nature of the substance which, though characterized erroneously as a 'gateway drug,' is often misunderstood by those who have never used it. Quite certainly, the vast majority of individuals advocating the maintenance or strengthening of laws against its usage fall into this category.
"For those draw policy hawks in the United States who fear that a more lax drug policy of any type could be socially destructive, there are many examples in the world community of the success which can be there achieved. One example which was encountered in the research process here was Portugal, which like many nations in Western Europe has largely taken a policy of tolerance or decriminalization where marijuana is concerned. The outcome has been uniformly positive from a taxation perspective with little evidence of the frightening consequences declaimed by conservative American lawmakers."

Tags:law, enforcement, war, on, drugs, taxpayers

Abstract
This paper analyzes the issue of marijuana decriminalization for medical purposes. Starting with a discussion of an upcoming Supreme Court ruling, the author provides an analysis of the case for decriminalization, including a recent book full of anecdotal evidence. The author then discusses how the federal government has taken a hard line against marijuana users and even doctors who prescribe the drug. This no-compromises attitude led to a lawsuit in 1997, in which several prominent doctors and patients sued the Drug Czar and Barry McCaffrey for violating their rights when, under Proposition 215, marijuana could be used in California and Arizona for medical reasons. The doctors claimed that they had been threatened by the DEA for prescribing the drug, while patients had been arrested and faced stiff penalties. The case has gone back and forth several times, while Proposition 215 has been suspended. The outcome is unclear, and the author finished the essay by describing how decriminalization necessitates removing marijuana from "Schedule I" status, which is reserved for dangerous drugs which have no medicinal value.

Abstract
The paper maintains that marijuana laws are costly and ineffective and its decriminalization will allow for a more judicious allocation of funds. The paper argues that decriminalization will undermine the black market and will not precipitate the increased consumption of the narcotic by young people. The paper concludes that the positives of decriminalization certainly outweigh the negatives.

From the Paper
"To begin with, the marijuana laws in America are costly to enforce and inefficacious. For instance, a July 2005 report revealed that federal spending devoted to enforcing criminal sanctions against marijuana use runs to around $4 billion each year - and yet fails to make any perceptible impact upon the country's perception of, or use of, marijuana. What makes the matter more problematic is the fact that the federal government spends more on enforcing marijuana prohibition than it does on policy formulation or on treatment programs (Hemp Information, para.1). Suffice it to say, any laws which are costly and which have little impact upon a perceived problem should be dramatically altered in their scope and application - or struck down entirely."

Tags:drugs, laws, black, market, gateway, substance, abuse

Abstract
The paper begins by discussing state-based initiatives that are based on making marijuana a low police priority. The paper then addresses the arguments of individuals and organizations who continue to be against any type of decriminalization/legalization or the loosing up of current marijuana laws. The paper points out that many state and city-based governments across the United States are coming to realize that the legalization of marijuana has added benefits related to economics and social welfare. The paper concludes that the question as to whether or not to legalize marijuana should be left up to the American people via a national referendum, rather than to law enforcement officials, the DEA and the FDA.

From the Paper
"According to Paul Armentano of NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), these type of initiatives "tap into the sentiments of local voters" and have yielded some success, especially in the city of Seattle, where "their law has some teeth and has yielded a drastic reduction in local arrests" ("Lowest Law Enforcement Priority," 2006, Internet). Obviously, due to the success of these and similar state and city-based initiatives, the viewpoint of making marijuana a low police priority indicates that voters may not be too far away from either decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana on a state-wide basis.
"Of course, there are individuals and organizations that continue to be wholly against any type of decriminalization/legalization or the loosing up of current marijuana laws. For example, in the state of Montana, initiative organizers and supporters "face much opposition from local law enforcement and youth substance abuse prevention groups" that claim legalizing marijuana will lead to a great increase in the number of users. However, as the organizers of the low police priority initiative point out, the evidence to support this assertion does not exist; in fact, "We know that liberalizing drug laws in other places has not led to an increase in drug use. This assertion has also been equated with the "Reefer Madness mentality," a reference to the film "Reefer Madness" of the 1930's which depicted marijuana smokers as deranged criminals ("Lowest Law Enforcement Priority," 2006, Internet)."

Tags:legalization, taxes, prohibition, law, enforcement

Abstract
The paper discusses the significant economic effects of criminalization and prosecution of marijuana and questions whether the social benefits are worth the costs. The paper takes the position that the economic effect of continuing to criminalize marijuana doesn't make sense. The paper explains that since the costs are so hard to quantify there will likely never be a consensus on this issue. The paper also notes that what is indisputable is that the legal status of marijuana, whether it is criminalized or decriminalized, has a large economic impact on society.

From the Paper
"In recent years many individuals - including some prominent economists - have advocated the decriminalization of marijuana. These proponents argue that the decriminalization of marijuana would, among other things, allow society to divert resources previously used on drug offenders to other more productive issues, reduce the profits of those who deal in illegal drugs, reduce drug related crime, and eliminate the overcrowding of the prison system. Advocates of legalization make an analogy between current day drug policies and Prohibition. During Prohibition, the United States devoted a large amount of resources to fighting the sale and consumption of alcohol, while bootleggers made large amounts of money illegally selling alcohol."

Tags:social, costs, resources, economics