Activity 7- UF Law Review’s “Legalize Marijuana? A Conversation with the Experts”

The UF Law Review’s “Legalize Marijuana? A Conversation with the Experts” was a very interesting panel forum that provided insight to the debate on whether or not marijuana should be legalized. Both sides of the issue provided very good arguments and supporting details for their view on the subject.

Panelists in favor of legalization argued that as of 2012 the public opinion on legalizing marijuana increased to 52%. This shows that society is becoming more and more accepting of this drug and its potential benefits. Perhaps the strongest argument for the legalization of medical marijuana is the fact that it can be used as a pain reliever for those with severe pain and those suffering from cancer and other chronic illnesses. Additionally, as far as medical benefits, there are a number of studies show marijuana is as effective at increasing food intake as the drug Marinol. This can be very helpful in cancer patients. Another argument for the legalization of marijuana is that medication does not have to be effective for everything in order for it to have a benefit. During the panel there were several more arguments in favor of legalizing marijuana. The panelists in favor of legalization argued that abuse potential should not be a criteria when considering whether or not marijuana should be moved down from schedule I due to the fact that drugs such as amphetamines have abuse potential and are not schedule I drugs. Additionally, it was argued that although dosage can be varied and higher in marijuana, it does not mean people will consume more of the drug. It would just mean that one would smoke less. The example that was used was that one wouldn’t drink a stiff drink the same as beer. Proponents argued that scientific literature is biased and that we can predict how people respond to drugs. A proponent for legalization stated that it is hard to project if it is good or bad for public health. One final point of importance was that changes made in regards to legalizing marijuana do not have to be permanent.

As far as prohibition goes, the panelists argued that marijuana should remain a Schedule 1 drug because it has a high potential for abuse, has no medical purpose, and does not have a proven safety standard. In support of this argument, the DSM-5 was sighted in reference to the cannabis abuse disorder. As far as the use of marijuana for medical purposes, there is not enough research and data to back this up by FDA standards. Panelists also argued that potency of the drug is an issue and each strain can differ. Another argument is that researchers do not have any information on long-term safety consequences of the drug and not every person reacts to drugs in the same way. There are several physical effects that marijuana use can have on people, especially the young. These include lower IQ by an average of 8 points, mental disorders, anxiety, and increased risk of testicular cancer. Legalization proponents argue that alcohol and tobacco have very severe negative health concerns and have high-risk potential, so why should marijuana be held to a higher standard? In response to this, those in favor of marijuana prohibition argue that this does not justify adding yet another substance to the legal market just because the others are legal. This could lead to yet another drug epidemic problem in society like the prescription pill epidemic. Proponents of prohibition pointed out that places that have dispensaries have more adult recreational use of marijuana. Additionally, the legalization of medical marijuana would increase use in younger people. When the drug is perceived as more dangerous it is less likely to be used. Also, people putting money into promoting and advocating the safety for marijuana far outnumber those against it. There is team of people that hide and suppress evidence against marijuana. As far as public policy, it was pointed out in the forum that there are three levels of government- federal, state, and local.  The legalization of marijuana in certain states causes issues due to the fact that it conflicts with federal policy. This discrepancy between state/local and federal government is one of concern because it causes tension between the two levels of government. In addition, it can cause tension between local and state governments if their laws differ from one another.

In conclusion, I really enjoyed watching this lecture and listening to the different sides of the argument. It really opened my mind to both sides of the issue and gave me a better idea of the consequences and benefits legalizing marijuana.