Introduction of Marijuana Essay Example

Introduction of Marijuana Essay Example Introduction of Marijuana Essay Introduction of Marijuana Essay The use of marijuana has been an active past time for thousands of years, however, it did not reach the United States until around 1912. A wave of Mexican immigrants was entering the country in the effort to find work; with them came marijuana. The use of marijuana was a normal custom among the Mexican people, but the White Americans in towns bordering Mexico saw the use of this particular plant in a different light. Fueled with racism and frustration associated with the lack of work for the American people, whites proclaimed that the smoking of marijuana gave the Mexicans super-human strength and transformed those who smoked it into violent murderers. With the increase in rumors of bloodshed and mayhem brought about by Mexicans on marijuana-rampages, the city council of El, Paso, Texas passed a law, the El Paso Ordinance of 1914, banning the possession of marijuana (Grass: The History of Marijuana). As a result, the regulation not only provided a way to control marijuana, but Mexicans as well. THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS AND UNIFROM STATE NARCOTIC LAW Meanwhile, those Americans who did not reside in states bordering Mexico were quite unfamiliar with the use of marijuana, and were much more concerned with the then current war on opium, morphine, cocaine, and heroin addiction plaguing society. In the early 1930’s the United States government decided that these public health issues of addiction could be handled by the United States Department of Treasury, who in turn established the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (R. J. Bonnie, 1970). Harry J. Anslinger was assigned as the Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Anslinger was an alcohol prohibitionist who believed that â€Å"progress can only be achieved by controlling the deprived impulses of the masses†; he believed that if laws implemented in society were strict enough and if enough people were punished for partaking in prohibited acts, the public would steer away from wrongdoing. Anslinger believed this same philosophy would work in America’s war against dope. However, Anslinger found it hard to regulate drug use in all 48 states; he was only one man and during the Depression, it was difficult to find financial backing for such a feat. Anslinger sought the solution to his problem among the forty-eight states of America; he aimed to influence each state to individually control drug use and trafficking among its citizens. Anslinger planned to do this by getting each state to sign a joint agreement that would commit a portion of each state’s resources to the drug control, the Uniform State Narcotic Law. However, only nine states agreed (New York, New Jersey, Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, and Indiana), the other states believed that the agreement allowed the federal government to interfere with state affairs (Grass, 1999). Meanwhile, New Orleans was a major port city that trafficked marijuana into the United States by way of West Indian sailors. It was known as muggles, tea, or reefer on the streets of New Orleans, and grew extremely popular among the jazz crowd in the city due to the proclamation that music sounded notably better after a â€Å"reefer stick†. Musicians began to bring marijuana from New Orleans to cities farther north up the Mississippi River, increasing the drug’s popularity in larger cities of America. With this growing popularity and awareness, Anslinger saw targeting marijuana as the means to his end; he concluded that if he could convince white America that marijuana was an absolute menace, the frightened voters would push their state legislature to agree to his Uniform State Narcotic Law (R. J. Bonnie, 1970). The media was Anslinger’s primary weapon in leading all Americans to believe that marijuana was the most dangerous social issue that had ever faced the country; the use of marijuana was tied to the likes of murder, insanity and death; mothers were told to protect their children from becoming slaves to the drug and movies were made linking the smoking of marijuana with immediate insanity, murderous rage or committing suicide (Grass, 1999). The negative propaganda eventually obtained a firm grasp on the minds of the American people, one by one, each state signed the Uniform State Narcotic Law; Anslinger’s method of exaggeration and manipulation went according plan. THE MARIJUANA STAMP ACT A frightened America demanded that society be protected by the threat of marijuana, and sought relief within the power of the federal government. On June 14, 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act was signed into law by President Roosevelt without any â€Å"public debate, scientific inquiry, or political objection† (Grass, 1999). The act prohibited the possession of any marijuana unless one also possessed a marijuana tax stamp which was provided by the Department of Treasury, however, in order to obtain a stamp act, one had to present to authorities his or her amount of marijuana, which was illegal in and of itself. Through this extremely misleading form of legislation, the Department of Treasury effectively made marijuana possession illegal, and subsequently lead to hundreds of arrests. LA GUARDIA VERSUS ANSLINGER The enactment of the Marijuana Stamp Act brought with it skepticism from many white Americans, especially in the northeast region of the country. Those who opposed the Stamp Act believed that its implementation brought with it the return of prohibition, an aspect of legislation they did not want to see in existence again (R. Dietch, 2003). Fiorello La Guardia was the mayor of New York during Anslinger’s relentless crusade against marijuana’s use and possession, and he too was against prohibition and the criminalization of marijuana. La Guardia was skeptical of the claims that were made by the federal government in relation to the effects the use has on the mind, and consequently lead a committee of 31 impartial scientists in the investigation of the physical and mental effects marijuana use has on a human being. The La Guardia Committee Report was conducted for five years (1939 – 1944) in which it concluded that the effects of marijuana use did not agree with the perception of the Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics; a perception forced upon and used to frighten the people of America. The report stated that the use of marijuana did not â€Å"lead to violent or antisocial behavior, did not cause uncontrollable sexual urges, and did not alter a person’s basic personality structure† (Grass, 1999). Also, unlike the claims made by the federal government, the information provided by the La Guardia Committee Report, entitled The Marihuana Problem in the City of New York, was supported by scientific evidence and testimony from marijuana users (R. Deitch, 2003). In response to the threat of his credibility, Anslinger had the report discredited and destroyed all copies that he was able to obtain; he labeled the authors as â€Å"dangerous men† and referred to the evidence in the report as â€Å"giddy sociology and medical mumbo-jumbo† (M. Booth, 2005). The determined Anslinger did not allow the plights of science to diverge from him from his course; he targeted the degenerate moral influence of actors and musician in the entertainment industry, â€Å"the missionaries carrying its evil gospel to the world† (M. Booth, 2005). Anslinger obtained control not only over movie contracts, but pilot and book contracts as well; he gained control over the film industry and spent $220 million in the production of films that supported his views in relation to the dangerous effects marijuana could have on one’s life. Musicians were also targeted, especially black jazz musicians; he believed black jazz musicians were the source of this reefer evil, and white marijuana smokers were merely corrupted by black influence through their mainstream music (M. Booth, 2005). RED CHINA AND THE NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT OF 1956 With the approach of the 1950s, the number of heroin addicts was increasing, especially among young teens. Crimes of theft were high among these strung out teenagers who turned to illegal acts in an effort to support their drug habit. Anslinger and the federal government saw an opportunity in this new heroin craze, and deemed marijuana use the reason for the increase in heroin addicts; â€Å"if you smoke it, you will become a heroin addict† (R. J. Bonnie, 1970). With the new fabricated association between marijuana and heroin, tougher laws and greater penalties were demanded by the public for all drug offenses. Anslinger was quick to play on the growing fear of communism among the American people; he began to proclaim that behind every narcotics drug peddler was a communist â€Å"ready to overthrow the government† (Grass, 1999). Anslinger cleverly linked China as the direct source of the opiates that so many American people were becoming addicted to; it was believed by the public that â€Å"Red China† was trying to infiltrate America via the heroin needle (L. Sloman, 1998). In an effort not to appear nationally weak in the midst of a cold war and during the threat of the Red Menace, and without any physical proof that the Chinese were behind the rise of opiates in the United States, Truman signed the Boggs Act of 1951 which implemented mandatory minimum sentences for all drug offenses. THE DECRIMINALIZATION OF MARIJUANA The passing of the Boggs act was followed by the passage of the Narcotic Control Act of 1956, which placed marijuana in the same category as heroin; the mandatory minimum sentence for possession of marijuana could result in 2 – 10 years in prison (R. J. Bonnie, 1970). Some states placed even harsher punishments for the possession of narcotics; in Missouri a 2nd conviction could place the defendant in prison for life. Anslinger’s ruthless campaign against the criminalization of marijuana finally came to an end in 1961 under the administration of former President John F. Kennedy in which he warned his successor that â€Å"the impending drug revolution is an assault on the foundation of western civilization†. Between the years of 1941 and 1963, the federal government spent $1. 5 billion on the â€Å"war against marijuana†. The use of marijuana was a new craze among college campuses in the mid 1960s, many of those who smoked marijuana no longer held the view depicting it as a dangerous substance, but as a way of declaring their independence. The new commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, Henry Giordano, began to publicize that the use of marijuana will make one an â€Å"unmotivated, dysfunctional loser† (Grass, 1999). Nixon continued to focus on drug crimes by pouring significant amounts of money into the training, equipping, and educating local policemen in recognizing evidence related to marijuana use. Minorities were not the only individuals being convicted for the possession of marijuana; those who were being arrested for marijuana charges consisted mainly of middle-class, white, American teenagers. As a matter of fact, the number of convicted young people was so high that the public began wonder if the legislation against marijuana was too strict; the laws were then seen as the problem in society, not marijuana. The passage of the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 officially reduced the penalty for possession of marijuana (L. Sloman, 1998). Between 1964 and 1969 the amount of money used in the control of marijuana use and possession was estimated to be $9 billion. As Nixon continued spend millions of dollars in the establishment of the Drug Enforcement Agency, many American citizens began to seek the decriminalization of private use and possession of marijuana. This sudden public desire for the decriminalization of marijuana could be tied to its use no longer being a youth phenomenon; middle class adults had begun smoking marijuana during social activities and the push for the legalization of marijuana began. The Ann Arbor City Ordinance of 1972 placed marijuana possession to a minor offense, comparable to a traffic ticket. The control of marijuana use is still significant today, though the laws and regulations for the possession and use of marijuana have become notably less strict in comparison to the laws that were implemented during the 1920s. Between the Jimmy Carter Administration and throughout the Regan Administration, the United States of America spent approximately $290 billion in its efforts to control the drugs on the streets of the country (Grass, 1999). THE WAR ON DRUGS America’s need to abolish the use of marijuana stemmed from the racial prejudice against Mexican immigrants and African Americans, and was fueled by false proclamations and loosely associated consequences. The War on Drugs resulted in a grand total of over $300 billion spent; this battle is surely to go down in history as one of the most lengthy and costly wars this nation has ever experienced with no end in sight.