Should Pot Be Legal?

Part 1 Of Point-Counterpoint Between Judge James Gray and Drug Free America Foundation's David Evans

(CBS)  Editor's Note: This is the first installment of a two-part debate CBS News.com is hosting between James P. Gray, a retired Orange County, Calif. judge who nowadays is a speaker for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, and David Evans, an author and advisor to the Drug Free America Foundation. Part 2 will be published on Tuesday. We asked both participants to begin by summarizing their positions on the question of marijuana legalization. Meanwhile, make sure to add your own perspectives in the comments section below.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Marijuana Nation

---

David Evans:
We cannot legalize marijuana because its use has destructive health and social consequences. Marijuana is far more powerful today than it was years ago and it serves as an entry point for the use of other illegal drugs. This is known as the "gateway effect." Despite arguments from the drug culture to the contrary, marijuana is addictive. This addiction has been well described in the scientific literature and it consists of both a physical dependence (tolerance and subsequent withdrawal) and a psychological habituation.

According to a US report released in June of 2008, the levels of THC - the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana - have reached the highest ever amounts since scientific analysis of the drug began in the late 1970s. The average amount of THC has now reached average levels of 9.6 percent (the highest level in one of the samples was 37.2 percent). This compares to the average of just under 4 percent reported in 1983.

Higher potency marijuana may be contributing to a substantial increase in the number of American teenagers in treatment for marijuana dependence. The latest information from the U.S. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS, 2006), reports that 16.1% of drug treatment admissions were for marijuana as the primary drug of abuse. This compares to 6% in 1992.

The use of marijuana in early adolescence is particularly dangerous. Adults who used marijuana early were five times more likely to become dependent on any drug and eight times more likely to use cocaine and fifteen times more likely to use heroin later in life.

Drug legalization advocates claim that marijuana is less dangerous than drugs like alcohol, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine. However, studies over the last few years give us a lot of new information about marijuana. They show that marijuana is not harmless but that it is toxic and addictive.

James Gray
I think that Dave, and everyone involved in this session, will agree that we are all on the same side of this issue, namely we all want to reduce drug abuse, and all of the crime and misery that accompanies it. Where we may have differences of opinion is how best to achieve that goal.

Dave raised some points that are in the minds of many people, and I welcome the opportunity to discuss them. But throughout this discussion I want to be clear on several things. First, I don't use marijuana, and you could give it away on every street corner and bless it by every religious leader in town, and I am still not going to use it -- unless I have some form of medical problem that a medical doctor feels can be helped by this as a medicine.

Second, I strongly agree with Milton Friedman that most of the harms that come from drugs, especially including marijuana, is because they are illegal. Yes, marijuana can have its harms, but far and away the most harmful thing connected with marijuana is jail.

Third, I agree with Dave that the strength of marijuana has seriously increased in the past years. But what Dave doesn't appear to recognize is that the reason is Drug Prohibition. Why? Because it is a cardinal reason of prohibition always to promote the stronger stuff. For example, if I were a bootlegger during Alcohol Prohibition (as opposed to Drug Prohibition, which is a time we now live in), I would be facing the same criminal justice risks for selling a barrel of beer as I would a barrel of bourbon. So which would I sell? That's easy, the bourbon. Why? Because I make more money off the stronger stuff, which is bourbon. The exact same principle holds true with regard to marijuana. For the same criminal justice penalties, I could make much more money selling stronger marijuana. So that is the fundamental reason why the strength has increased.

Are you concerned with these problems? They are all caused by Drug Prohibition. Why? Because as soon as you prohibit a substance, you give up all of your ability to have any say whatsoever about how it is sold, the quantities, qualities, age restrictions, or anything else.

The best resolution is to repeal the prohibition of marijuana. Then we could regulate and control it, tax it, and all of this would, as I said earlier, make this substance less available for children.

I have been on the bench in Orange County, California for 25 years, and a federal prosecutor and Navy JAG attorney before that, but there is no question whatsoever in my mind that the most patriotic thing I can do for the country that I love is to help us repeal these prohibitions.

I ask all of you to give all of these things some thought, use all of your experiences and observations, and help me to engage everyone in our country in a full, open, and honest discussion of this critical issue.

David Evans
Judge Gray has raised issues about legalization and marijuana related crime and that legalization of marijuana would reduce this problem. He also discusses taxes and hemp.

The legalizers claim that as legalized drugs become less expensive, people will no longer need to commit crimes in order to pay for their drug use. The problem with this claim is that some drugs are already inexpensive. Marijuana, the most abused and addictive drug for young people, is very inexpensive. Some drugs can be manufactured in home laboratories. In addition, if drugs were sold legally and have to comply with government regulations and pay the costs of taxes placed upon the legalized drug there is a question whether it is possible to reduce the current price of some drugs.

However, if legal drug suppliers could undersell the black market by offering drugs at a lower price the rates of addiction would rise. Even supporters of drug legalization admit that "low prices would encourage use." A good example of this is cocaine. Once cocaine began being marketed in the high potency and low cost form of "crack," addiction rates increased. If addiction rates increase - so will purchase-related crime. Higher levels of drug use cause increased crime, especially property crime to pay for the drugs.

Legalizing drugs would not reduce purchase-related crime, but may actually increase it for two reasons: (1) if we decrease the price of an addictive drug, addicts will merely buy more of it and need more money to buy drugs. (2) there will be more addicts stealing to meet living expenses such as food, rent, etc. Drug abusing offenders are the most active criminals. Dependency on drugs drives people to commit crimes to generate income. Drug users, many of whom are unable to hold jobs, commit robberies and other crimes not only to obtain drugs, but also to purchase food, shelter, clothing and other goods and services. Even if drugs were legalized, addicts will still need to pay the rent and may resort to crime to do so.

The advocates of legalization claim that drug users only damage themselves and therefore they have the right to use drugs. Others claim that if drugs were legal, crime and violence would decrease because it is the illegal nature of drug trafficking that fuels crime and violence, instead of the violent and irrational behavior that drugs themselves induce. The flaw in this argument is that most violent drug related crime is committed because people are under the influence of drugs. The use of drugs changes behavior and causes criminal activity because people will do things they wouldn’t do if they were rational and free of the drug’s influence.

Psychoactive drugs have a powerful impact on behavior. This influences people to commit crimes that have nothing to do with supporting the cost of their drug use. Some offenders suffer emotional and/or brain damage due to drug use, which contributes to mental illness or anti-social behavior. Cocaine-related paranoia is an example. If drug use increases with legalization, so will many forms of violent crime such as assaults, drugged driving, child abuse, and domestic violence.

If legalization will cause an increase in drug use, an increase in drug use certainly will create more criminal behavior. There is a strong connection between drug use and criminal behavior. Drug use studies show that two-thirds of all male and female arrestees tested positive for at least one drug. Cocaine was found in about one-half of males and females, and marijuana was found in 25% of the men and 20% of the women. Opiates were found in 10% of the men and women. Twenty-five percent of the total sample tested positive for more than one illegal drug.

A survey of prison inmates showed that inmates report high levels of drug use prior to the commission of the crime for which they were incarcerated. In the month prior to the crime, 43% were using illegal drugs on a daily or near daily basis, and 19% were using heroin, methadone, cocaine, PCP, or LSD on a daily or nearly daily basis. The study also showed that 35% of the inmates reported they were under the influence of drugs at the time they committed the crime. Marijuana or hashish were most frequently used at the time of the crime.

Approximately 80% of the inmates in a 1986 survey had used drugs at some time in their lives. Only 13% of inmates seemed to fit the pattern of drug addicts who committed the crimes for gain. Of those sentenced for robbery, burglary, larceny, or a drug offence, one-half were daily drug users, and about 40% were under the influence of an illegal drug at the time they committed the crime. The greater an inmate's use of major drugs, the more prior convictions the inmate reported. Twenty-eight percent of the state inmates reported past drug problems with such drugs as heroin (14%), cocaine (10%), and marijuana or hashish (9%).

A US study of crime victims showed that 30 per cent perceived their attackers to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

A study published in the International Journal of Addictions links homicides to the use of marijuana. Interviews with 268 inmates in prison for homicides in New York demonstrated that 71% used marijuana within 24 hours of committing the crime and that they were experiencing some effect from the drug at the time of the crime. Twenty-five percent felt that the homicide was related to their use of marijuana before the crime.

If legalizing drugs will increase drug use, then drugged driving will also likely increase. Many studies show a clear correlation between drug use and motor vehicle accidents, trauma, and dangerous driving. More drugged driving will mean more dead and injured drivers and their innocent victims. Recent studies of intoxicated driving suspects indicate that approximately one-third of those failing standard field sobriety tests will test positive for illegal drugs. Drug tests on the bodies of 168 fatally injured truck drivers found that marijuana was found in 13%; cocaine was found in 8% and amphetamines in 7%.

A New Era for U.S. Drug Policy?
Inside Holland's "Half Baked" Pot Policy
America's Love-Hate History with Pot
Pot Not Focus of Anti-Drug Campaigns
Does the Pot Pill Work?

James Gray
This conversation is helpful, because Dave Evans is bringing up many issues that are on the minds of lots of people. I will go through them, line by line, and discuss them. But the difference between my discussion and that of Dave Evans is that I will respond to his points, and even acknowledge the strength of some of them, because no program is perfect. But he probably will not do the same thing. Because one thing is clear. We are facing two substantial issues here: one is drug problems, and I do not intend anything

I say in this area to minimize them. But the second is drug money problems, and without a doubt, these are far, far worse than the drug problems. So far, you have not heard Mr. Evans even address, much less acknowledge, the drug money problems expressly caused by our policy of Drug Prohibition, both here and around the world. I ask him to respond to them as well.

He says: "The legalizers claim that as legalized drugs become less expensive, people will no longer need to commit crimes in order to pay for their drug use."

First of all, calling us "legalizers" is a tactic that most people who support our present policy use. And it is expressly intended to freeze people's minds, and shut off discussion. Why? Because the use of that term brings the connotation of such things like that people like me don't care if your 14 year-old daughter buys cocaine in a vending machine across the street from her junior high school, or other such idiocy. Now I know Dave Evans, and he is not included in this statement, but that is exactly the connotation that most people who use that term wish to convey. And it is not true, at all! In fact I hate what some of these drugs do so much that I want to change our system to reduce those harms!

And besides, this sounds technical, but it is an important distinction, I do not want "legalize" anything. When you think of the legalization of drugs, think of aspirin. There are no restrictions on advertising, quantity, age of purchaser, or location of sale, and the price is set by the free market. What I wish to install is a system of the strictly regulated distribution of some of these drugs -- starting with marijuana. This would be similar to what we do now with tobacco and alcohol. And in order to keep the marijuana from being advertised, the government would have to own the product. Would there be problems? Of course, because as I said, no program is perfect.

But this system would be far, far, far better than what we are doing now. In fact, anything would be better than what we are doing now!

With regard to his comment that people will no longer need to commit crimes in order to pay for their drug use, that is silly. Of course many will because nothing is perfect. But that crime would be greatly reduced. For this, please focus upon the results in Portugal, where they decriminalized the use of all drugs back in 2001. Mr. Glenn Greenwald of the CATO Institute published a report about the results just a few months ago, and he reported that when this occurred, overall drug usage became slightly lower, but problem drug usage was reduced by about half!

The reason behind this was twofold. First, under the prior criminal system, drug addicted people legitimately feared their own government, so they were highly unlikely to bring their problems to the government. But now that people would only receive an administrative citation for the use or possession of drugs, which would require them to appear before a medical staff to discuss their drug usage (and this staff was not at all connected to the criminal justice system), the drug addicted people were now willing to enter treatment programs is much, much greater numbers.

Second, now that the government was no longer spending such large amounts of money on the investigation, prosecution, and incarceration of drug-addicted people, they had much more money to use for drug treatment. So those treatment programs were funded. This is seen as a truly effective program, and is one we should not only study, we should emulate.

The first sentence of Mr. Evans' second paragraph says: "However, if legal drug suppliers could undersell the black market by offering drugs at a lower price the rates of addiction would rise. Even supporters of drug legalization admit that 'low prices would encourage use.'" He is basically right. Anyone with half a sense of economics will understand that if the demand is the same, and the price is cut in half, or even reduced, (and the substance is no longer illegal for adults), usage will certainly increase. But not necessarily addiction. Actually, as we have already addressed by the experience of Portugal, addiction and other problem drug usage would probably decrease, because treatment would be more available, and the drug addicted people no longer would be automatic criminals, so they would be much more likely to seek help.

And if we followed the experience of Holland, where all drugs were decriminalized several decades ago, after 6 to 12 to maybe 18 months, probably usage would decrease as well. The Minister of Health of Holland held a news conference numbers of years ago and said that their country, where anyone 16 years of age or older can go to a coffee house and get marijuana, they only have half the marijuana usage per capita as we do in the United States -- even for teenagers!! And then he went on to explain why by saying that "We have succeeded in making pot boring." Of course, we glamorize it in our country by having it illegal, and by having an incredible profit margin to sell it to us, our neighbors and our children. We must learn from Holland's experience. This is more fully discussed in my book "Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed." Holland does have one problem, however, that they do not know what to do about, and that problem is that a full third of the people who use and abuse drugs in their country are foreigners. I have no suggestions, but obviously since we are so much larger, we wouldn't be as likely to have the problem.

[pinehillhouse]

Yes please legalize. There are way too many people in jail just because they prefer to smoke marijuana in lieu of drinking alcohol.
When will they get it right.....ALCOHOL is the gateway drug and it is legal and does far more damage than marijuana.
Also, marijuana's use for medicinal purposes have been proven to be valid.
How many of you out there smoked pot before you ever took a drink? I guarantee not many-at least not in my generation.
As a matter of fact I think that cigarettes are probably many people's
gateway drug. Seems that is the first think we try as youngsters.

Any drug that is abused can cause severe consequences both mentally and physically. When you combine two of any drug you may get adverse effects...listen to the warnings on the prescription commercials on television for the "legal" drugs. Oh that is right they are medicines.
Amen Birdman 313
I know people who have smoked recreationally for 25-30 years..they hold down management positions in many companies, come to work everyday and do an excellent job. Why is it wrong? It is not.

They also need to stop teaching children in school that marijuana is in the same class as cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, barbiturates and psychedelic drugs...it is NOT anywhere close..and that is where they do the damage to our children...
the kids smoke pot and find out "wow...that did not effect me like I was told in school...as a result they think it is okay to investigate the other drugs because they figure they won't harm them either but they can and they so much more easily than marijane will.
So to our american educators ..please stop lying to our children about this1

[westernkypika]

Please legalize it!!! NO MORE PROHIBITION!!! Please write to your representative in voicing your views on the subject of legalizing marijuana which is badly needed. Become proactive on the subject and no longer stand in the shadows wishing these crazy politicians would pass something worthwhile for a change. Obama ran on the campaign of change well its about time he stops being a puppet. Marijuana is safer then tobacco and alcohol. Have the government legalize it and profiting from it through taxation and reduce violence through removing drug dealer's and drug cartel's capital while regulating it to a required minimal age 21 like alcohol so our kids don't get a hold of it. Do you think a drug dealer cares how old your kid is when they are looking to sell dope? Often times the drug dealers will lore kids in to the glamor of drug trade and get them on harder drugs that are far more dangerous and addicting then pot. Marijuana being illegal does FAR more damage to people then the actual use of the substance. You wont stop the growing number of users or the supplies so your better of legalizing a harmless substance such as marijuana.

[bkuper69]

the only reason marijuana is a gateway drug is because it is in the hands of drug dealers who happen to sell harder drugs which were mentioned by Mr David Evans if you put marijuana in a store the only worse thing that it could lead you too is either alcohal or cigarettes. Everything Mr. Evans said about how harmful marijuana is, is not true he was just mentioning other drugs such as crack-cocaine and PCP. there have been 0 recorded deaths due to marijuana use ever.

[rockcutr]

The debate has been going on for most of my life. I'm in my 50's. You can find more excuses for making BBQ illegal than pot. A bad piece of meat actually kills. The only conculsion that I can come to is that the Government actually makes money on the so called war on drugs. Yet, this is hard to believe with the huge population of pot convicted prisoners. Then what happens when they have to let all the cons go? At $40,000 per prisoner per year of expenses, just maybe we could balance the budget. But, that would make sence. So, how has the war on drugs been going? The real answer is "not so good". Reduction in use just hasn't happened. But, a huge problem here is simply ego of law enforcement. And just really how stupid they look wasting all this time chasing hippies.

[jankebenzone]

Legalize pot??? Sure why not, a few more million brain dead idiots running around is sure to improve things.
Oh,all you pot smokers who claim no adverse affects after years of use, the wino and the druggie laying in the back ally usually also claim their habits are not to blame. You might think you're normal but you stand out like a sore thumb by the facial features and the diminished intellect evident in the speech.

[datrebor]

janke just like Dave I have no idea where you 2 are getting you info but your both are wrong. There are plenty of smart productive pot smokers out there. Alcohol and some drugs will cause problems that has been shown before but pot is safe and used for medical reasons. We don't think we are normal it we are in NORML,j/k I think you are talking about the Government. OK joking aside like anywhere else in this world you will find different level of intelligence in all walks of life not just the pot user. Now Dave basically just regurgitated that same OLD lies thats been talked about and proved wrong even the FDA wants Marijuana's category changed from 1 to 2 so it can be further tested to prove the studies so far have said that Marijuana is Save, Non-additive, Not a Gateway Drug and when legal could save and raise for this country revenue in the hundreds of millions per year.

[DJBLAZEN]

Mr evans is so out of touch with reality.

[therxbandit]

Hello,I am just a typical college student who happens to enjoy smoking weed on a regular basis. I stumbled upon this debate while in class today and just had to express my opinion, because arguements like this tend to upset me. I think the problem is that the two people in this debate apparentely have no personal experience with marijuana. How are you supposed to talk about the effects of smoking weed if you have never in fact done it yourself. This guy David Evans is saying a lot about how marijuana is addictive and can be a gateway drug, but he has no idea what it actually does. That would be like me telling him that every friday in his foundation is bring some weed to work day. Obviously he would tell me I'm wrong and an idiot because I don't work there and would have no idea what goes on there. That is why I'm writing to tell him that he is wrong and an idiot, because I know a lot more about this topic than he does. He is just going based off of whatever research happens to back up his point, the same way anyone else could find research to say the opposite. If these people had actual experience with doing drugs and trying to obtain drugs, they would understand the situation a lot better. Weed is most definately not a gateway drug. Unfortunately, to get weed you have to deal with shady drug dealers who try and push whatever else they have on you. Anyone who has ever been in a high pressure sales situation can understand the feeling someone would get trying to say no to some big cary dude trying to get you to buy coke. Being an avid lover of ganja myelf, I have been through this experience many times, but have always managed to leave with just some fresh herb. As for the part about weed being addictive, most people who smoke will tell you it is absolutely not addictive. This isn't just because they are naive stoners, but because they genuinly aren't addicted to it. I said before that I smoke weed on a daily basis, and I have no problem not smoking when I go away to my grandparents for a few weeks. I like to smoke weed becaue I enjoy the way it makes me feel and the act of smoking, the same way I eat pizza because I enjoy the taste of pizza and the act of eating. Would it then be safe to say that I am addicted to pizza? No, of course not, that is incredibly stupid to say. So why do these people assume that just because someone likes to smoke every once in a while, or maybe many times more than that, that they are addicted to that substance. That is an extremely ignorant way to look at things. I wish that politicians and all others lobbying against weed would stop using such unfair and untrue tactics against bud to get their way. Maybe for the next debate these guys should do some real research and maybe smoke a blunt or rip a bong.

[a9stokes]

This Usa-Is now so Druged up--They do not know what they are doing from one day to the next--Marijuana-used as amedicine--only by strict ok by a doctor YES--But to be sold all over--we are just asking for a comlete take over by the strongest Comunistic government in the world==because we will all be so full of drugs we will not have a brain to -control our USA-We are puppets now--Just wait until the pot heads all give take over--no fight just all brainless individuals!!

[therxbandit]

You must really have no faith in our armed forces if you think the only thing needed to take over this country is to legalize weed.

[YourVeryWrong]

Rodney Dangerfield: ?I tried marijuana once. Just once, that's all. I didn't know what I was doing. I was on cocaine at the time...?

[Birdman313]

The more we try to legislate morality, the further we get from freedom.

[earthling76]

Enough said.