Dirty Hands Just Got Dirtier.
Everyone
has heard the buzz about Amendment 64. Amendment 64 allows for personal use and
regulation of marijuana for people above the age of 21. (If you haven't heard (click here))
Personal
Use: People 21 and older are allowed to have up to one ounce of marijuana
(cannabis/weed). You can also grow up to three immature and three mature
marijuana plants (privately). On top of it all, you can give it as a gift (1
oz.) to people 21 and older... (how considerate). When it comes to driving,
similar rules apply to the use of the drug compared to driving under the
influence of alcohol.
1,307,728
people voted YES
1,073,430
people voted No
There are many mixed feelings about this
Amendment passing. Some people are in full support, they feel that the
government should play no role in regulation of cannabis. Also people believe
that having this amendment will lead to a lower use of marijuana in teens,
because you have to be 21 in order to use it. Some say the cannabis is safe,
and there are many other “worse drugs” out there.
On the flip side, some people oppose
completely. They say marijuana use is addictive, and it "permanently
affects brain development, impairs learning ability and contributes to
depression." (http://votenoon64.com/SmartColoradoFactSheet.pdf)
I personally believe that marijuana use has no business being in ANY
state constitution, and Amendment 64 is completely ridiculous.
Aside from the supporters, people who oppose, and my personal opinion,
Amendment 64 passed.
John Hickenlooper is the Governor of Colorado. (http://www.colorado.gov/governor/) Back
in September, Hickenlooper
came out in opposition to the amendment saying, “Colorado is known
for many great things –- marijuana should not be one of them."
Hickenlooper added, "Amendment 64 has the potential to increase the number
of children using drugs and would detract from efforts to make Colorado the
healthiest state in the nation. It sends the wrong message to kids that drugs
are OK."
That was in September, it is now November. What changed his mind over
the past 2 ½ months. What makes the legalization of marijuana OK?
This amendment will go into effect as soon as Govenor Hickenlooper
certifies the results of the vote. (To be clear: HE IS CERTIFYING IT)
So
here is my concern…
The
question from The Problem of Dirty Hands is…
“Should political leaders violate the deepest constraints of morality in
order to achieve great goods or avoid disasters for their communities?”
Two
months ago Govenor Hickenlooper made a statement that showed he didn’t believe
in the legalization of marijuana. He even specifically says it gives off the
message that, “drugs are ok.” By passing this Amendment he violates his own
integrity. But what I wonder is how is he achieving “great goods” or “avoiding
disaster” for Colorado.
I
understand having “dirty hands” when good will come out of the situation. But I
do not think there is any good that comes out of Amendment 64. To me this is a
case of “the dirtiest” of hands. Govenor Hickenlooper went against his morals,
and didn’t make his community any better.
Marijuana is
a drug. Bottom line. Marijuana has many short-term effects such as-- Distorted
perception (sights, sounds, time, touch), problems with memory and learning,
lack of proper coordination, trouble with problem-solving, increased heart rate
and reduced blood pressure. Marijuana affects the heart,
lungs, and brain.
I believe
that having “dirty hands” is ok is some situations. For example going to war to
protect our country. No one wants to go to war, but some times it is necessary.
Legalizing marijuana, going against your morals, and no good coming out of it….
I believe Amendment 64/Gov. Hickenlooper brought dirty hands to a whole new
level.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAllison,
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you wholeheartedly. I don't think your argument is very good for a number of reasons. You say that "no good" comes out of this law, but your are sadly mistaken.Even in Washington, they threw out hundreds of cases in anticipation for this law. That means that the state doesn't have to pay the judges, waste the time, and saves room in prisons in some cases. In some cities, marijuana is decriminalized. However, in others its not. Arresting people for smoking a substance that has hardly any negative long term effects is ridiculous. Its wastes the time of law enforcement officials, who could use the time to prosecute real crimes. Not to mention that the war on drugs has cost many innocent lives, and tons of taxpayer money for a substance that has less negative effects on you as alcohol. Alcohol has cost exponentially more lives, and parents drink right in front of their kids! We advertise the substance, and its a common part of society. The funny thing is that alcohol has destroyed whole families, yet we continue to outlaw a substance that is less harmful. The whole thing is ridiculous.
-Matt
Allison,
ReplyDeleteThe topic of this post is very interesting. I see your attempt at connecting the legalization of marijuana to the problem of "dirty hands." However, I think you may have missed your mark. I want to address my two main disagreements with your post.
Firstly, you argue that Governor Hickenlooper has "dirtied his hands," but nothing good will come out of the passing of Amendment 64. This technically would not be a case of dirty hands. A politician has dirty hands when he does something morally wrong to achieve something right. If nothing good is achieved in the passing of Amendment 64, then Hickenlooper doesn't have dirty hands. He is just a bad person for certifying it.
Secondly, I will have to disagree with your thoughts on Amendment 64. From the government's prospective, some good will come out of it. Certainly, they will be able to place a tax on marijuana and make revenue from it. I'm sure Governor Hickenlooper will have that on his mind when he certifies the amendment.
Allison,
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, i also have to respectfully disagree with you and your argument. There are a multitude of benefits that can be reaped from Amendment 64. First and foremost, through this amendment marijuana can be legally taxed in the state of Colorado. The taxation will generate millions of dollars in revenue and in this terrible economy,this taxation revenue will help the state of Colorado tremendously. According to the Huffington Post, the legal taxation of marijuana could produce anywhere between 5 and 20 million dollars a year for the state. Economists even project that by 2017, there could be as much as 60 million dollars generated. Through the set up of local dispensaries, jobs will be created and small business owners will flourish. Not to mention the effect the amendment would have on law enforcement. More time, and money, would be spent on more important and severe crimes ultimately creating a safer environment for everyone.
I have to agree with Matt that constant studies have shown that the effects of alcohol and tobacco are far worse than the effect of marijuana yet we continue to advertise for those industries. It doesn't make sense to me at all.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/amendment-64-passes-in-co_n_2079899.html
Hi Allison,
ReplyDeleteThe message of this post confuses me. You seem to be criticizing a governor’s decision to uphold the democratic process despite, well, personally disagreeing with the result. In fact, the basis of your entire disagreement is your own personal opinion on marijuana policy. Are you saying that politicians should get their hands dirty by trying to stifle the voice granted to the American people in the constitution every time that voice does not harmonize with the status quo? I don’t understand how Hickenlooper has “dirty hands” for rejecting that course of action. This argument also essentially gives the moral ‘right’ to any politician, left or right (whether they agree with you or not) to take action against policy they don’t approve of. What would be left of our democracy if that kind of thing was commonplace?
Allison,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your opinion as it pertains to the amendment, as I am steadfastly against the idea of individual states legalizing or decriminalizing drugs such as marijuana, but I think you're off the mark on Gov. Hickenlooper. The governor has remained in stark opposition to Amendment 64 throughout the entire process, including after its passage. On the Wednesday after the election, Hickenlooper warned (and mocked) Coloradan marijuana users not to "break out the Cheetos yet," because possession is still illegal under federal law.
I believe the crux of our disagreement comes in the role of the governor on issues of referendum. While the governor's office must certify all election results in Colorado (which varies from most states in which this process is done by the Secretary of State), this is not like legislation where he has veto power. If the legislature passed this measure and Hickenlooper signed the bill into law, I would agree with you wholeheartedly, but he has no authority to overturn the will of the popular vote in matters of referendum - to do so would be arbitrary and capricious.
You're right on with your message, I'm just not sure what exactly you think Gov. Hickenlooper could have done without grossly overstepping the powers enumerated to him in the state constitution of Colorado.
Best,
Brad
Very interesting post!
ReplyDeleteIt seems as if you are accusing Governor Hickenlooper of not having dirty hands and of simply being an immoral politician. I disagree with this statement and accuse said governor of having dirty hands. Early on in a Economics 101 lecture, Professor Gerson mentioned how the legalization of marijuana would benefit the economy greatly, reducing debt everywhere it is legalized. Perhaps Hickenlooper is going against his morals in order to benefit his state economically, which may outweigh the negative effects of marijuana on the population. The main conflict here stems from the conflict between economic prosperity and the general health of the population after marijuana is legalized.
Additionally, I have read a few studies regarding the use of marijuana and none of them make marijuana seems anywhere near as harmful as alcohol is to the health and well-being of American citizens. So if alcohol is legalized, why not marijuana? Nevertheless, there is tremendous debate that can be had on this topic. If you would like to offer a response, please comment and let me know what you think!
Ben