I was surfing around today and came across this article in the Daily Trojan that says students have mixed feelings about marijuana legalization as it relates to the effects that could have on the economy.
Jon Gettman, a longtime policy analyst who holds a Ph.D. in public policy, has published a new study contending that legalizing marijuana would create tax revenue and save taxpayers millions of dollars. If marijuana were legalized and taxed, similar to alcohol and other commodities, those who use the drug would be paying the taxes, he said.
The study found that the United States is losing $30 million to underground marijuana sales and diverting money from the regional economy, Gettman said.
I'm supportive of just about any argument and activism that helps to legalize marijuana, namely because I believe everyone should have a right to smoke or perform any other activity they wish so long as it does no harm to anyone else. However, I'm not so sure the "let's legalize pot because it would be a windfall for the government" angle is the most productive avenue to take here (even though marijuana prohibition does run taxpayers over $40 billion in criminal justice costs and lost tax revenues).
Marijuana legalization should not be contingent upon its perceived positive effects for the economy. This outlook assumes that the state, not the individual, is the arbiter of all that is decent and good in society. For one thing, increased tax revenues would merely result in even more government programs aimed at regulating our lives. And more importantly, using marijuana is either right or wrong based on moral implications, not on whether or not a cabal of bureaucrats can find enough economic benefit to the community. And it is no more immoral for people to smoke marijuana than it is for them to smoke cigarettes, drink whiskey, or eat potato chips.
People are entitled to use and enjoy their property as they see fit. And if people have the right to own their body (their property), they consequently have the moral right to use it in any capacity they choose so long as their actions coerce no one else in the process, either physically or monetarily, despite the self-righteousness or moral indignation of busibodies. Many people believe they have the right to tell others what to do with their bodies because we have a misplaced belief that society should be responsible for paying for all the negative consequences that result from other people's bad decisions. But that's a problem of socialism, not of marijuana -- or of any other trendy vice-of-the-day like cigarettes, trans fats, or diet pills. What should it matter to us what anyone does to him or herself if the government isn't stealing our money to pay for any potential harm that results?
The short answer is, it shouldn't. However, that doesn't seem to stop some people from trying to mind other people's business. Despite our best efforts at trying to impress the virtues of personal freedom and liberty upon others, it always seems as if hysterical rhetoric wins the day over common sense reasoning. To wit:
Edward Newton, chairman of USC's department of emergency medicine, said he believes the country as a whole is not in favor of legalizing marijuana.
"If the government legalizes it, it's kind of an implicit endorsement of its use," he said. "You wouldn't want the pilot who is flying your plane to be stoned."
First of all, even though most Americans may not endorse outright legalization of marijuana, a majority does support the elimination of criminal penalties for adult pot use, and the vast majority of Americans supports the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes. Furthermore, arguing that legalization is an implicit endorsement of its use is ignorance on stilts. Rock climbing, skydiving, race car driving, and wife-swapping are all legal, but assuming that everyone in America would race to engage in all potentially dangerous activities simply because we have the freedom to do so is the argument of a fool.
Moreover, there is absolutely no merit to the argument that proponents of marijuana legalization believe pilots would all of a sudden begin to fly while stoned or that they advocate such activity. Anyone who causes an accident or puts anyone else's life at risk because he's driving or flying drunk or stoned is still civilly liable for his actions. Criminalizing this behavior simply affords the state an excuse to treat all of us like criminals, which is why I do believe it should be legal to, say, drive under the influence even though I wouldn't advocate such practice. But arguing that it should be legal to drive drunk and arguing that inebriated motorists who violate the property rights of others somehow shouldn't be held responsible for their actions are two very different things.
The entire essence of property rights is the idea that we should all be free to do anything we choose as long as it doesn't usurp the property rights of anyone else. When our actions do violate the rights of those around us, we most certainly deserve to face criminal or civil sanction. As for marijuana use, the real crime is empowering the federal government and so many of its state conspirators to harass, arrest, fine, and jail non-violent, freedom-loving Americans who do nothing to anyone but themselves. Try finding the morality in that.
Recent Comments