A Look At The Us Approach To Medical And Personal Use Of Cannabis, And What It Might Mean For The Rest Of The World.

[bobandtorey]

Wayne Hall takes a look at the US approach to medical and personal use of cannabis, and what it might mean for the rest of the world.

 

Policies towards the use of cannabis in the United States have changed radically in the past 20 years. For much of the past 40 years the US has had some of the highest rates of cannabis use and some of the most punitive policies towards it in the developed world.

Personal cannabis use was decriminalised in half the US states during the 1970s, but there was a return to punitive policies under Reagan.

Since 1996 around half – 23 – of the states, have legalised cannabis use in some form, for “medical purposes”. Legalisation often occurs by citizen-initiated referenda – a proposal that attracts the required number of signatures is put to the popular vote and, if passed by a majority, must be enacted by the state legislature.

Liberal medical marijuana laws arguably paved the way for the later legalisation of recreational cannabis use. Advocates defined medical use very broadly, allowing large numbers of users to obtain an indemnity against arrest under state law. Some states also allowed commercial “dispensaries” to supply cannabis to “patients” who had a doctor’s recommendation. This created a de facto legal cannabis market in states like California where 10 per cent of males aged 18-24 years reported “medical use”.

Increased public support for cannabis legalisation between 2009 and 2013 enabled the passage of referenda to legalise cannabis in Colorado and Washington State in 2012 and Alaska and Oregon in 2014. Similar proposals are likely to be voted on in 2016, including 10 competing initiatives in California.

So far Colorado, Oregon and Washington State have decided to regulate a legal cannabis market in much the same way as alcohol, limiting use to adults over the age of 21 (the legal drinking age), licensing producers, processors and retailers, and imposing a state tax. Critics are concerned this will lead to the commercialisation of the retail cannabis market with TV advertisements, special deals for frequent buyers etc. So far cannabis commercialisation has been constrained because the drug is still prohibited under US Federal law.

Should the citizens of these US states be worried about legalising cannabis? Those who see it as a wonder herb no doubt see legalisation as a good thing. It allows adults to use the drug without fear of arrest, it provides these states with a new source of tax revenue, and reduces the costs of enforcing the criminal law against cannabis users.

- See more at: http://www.policyforum.net/legal-in-the-usa-the-consequences-of-cannabis-laws/#sthash.05NylU6H.dpuf