Marijuana’s serves as an anecdote for many ailments that may not otherwise be able to be treated. Specifically, cases wherein the patient is diagnosed with cancer, HIV/AIDS, or and even stomach problems, leave patients with limited options in terms of immediate help in alleviating their excruciating pain. While the traditional treatment of taking pills is effective, some patients experience a difficult time holding the pill in their stomach so that it may begin to take effect (due to vomiting). Fortunately, marijuana offers an alternative: cannabis may be inhaled, as the patient is able to absorb the thc in his or her lungs; as an added benefit, the thc is able to flow through the blood brain barrier much quicker than pills (Clark43); this
…show more content…
For instance,The National Commision on Marijuana and Drug Abuse’s 1972 report on marijuana clearly emphasized that enforcement of marijuana policy was not only difficult, but ineffective as a whole (Shafer). Within their study of nine states, the organization conducted surveys and collected statistics on the states’ arrests and their prosecutions. In general, “federal authorities make little to no effort to seek out violators of laws proscribing possession of marijuana… [these cases] are generally dropped or turned over to the state for prosecution” (Shafer110). Statements such as this made by Shafer intimate that the efficacy towards enforcing marijuana policy is quite low. In fact, studies indicate that out of all individuals who are apprehended with marijuana, almost 70% have less than an ounce on them (Shafer111). These statistics serve to show that offenders are typically not convicted criminals; nor are they holding large amounts of cannabis - they are simply users, not drug lords. Lastly, of all the cases taken to the state, 50% are dropped for the general population while 70% are dropped for youth cases (Shafer111). Furthermore, this statistic is indicative that marijuana policy is inconsistent, and poses a valid
For instance,The National Commision on Marijuana and Drug Abuse’s 1972 report on marijuana clearly emphasized that enforcement of marijuana policy was not only difficult, but ineffective as a whole (Shafer). Within their study of nine states, the organization conducted surveys and collected statistics on the states’ arrests and their prosecutions. In general, “federal authorities make little to no effort to seek out violators of laws proscribing possession of marijuana… [these cases] are generally dropped or turned over to the state for prosecution” (Shafer110). Statements such as this made by Shafer intimate that the efficacy towards enforcing marijuana policy is quite low. In fact, studies indicate that out of all individuals who are apprehended with marijuana, almost 70% have less than an ounce on them (Shafer111). These statistics serve to show that offenders are typically not convicted criminals; nor are they holding large amounts of cannabis - they are simply users, not drug lords. Lastly, of all the cases taken to the state, 50% are dropped for the general population while 70% are dropped for youth cases (Shafer111). Furthermore, this statistic is indicative that marijuana policy is inconsistent, and poses a valid