The 1936 anti-marijuana propaganda movie “Reefer
Madness” ““ still watched by giggling red-eyed students
across the country ““ purports to show how taking a toke of
“the devil’s weed” can turn the nicest
all-American boy or girl into an uncontrollably horny, violent and
crazy addict.
It’s funny because as anyone who smokes weed knows, a
night of smoking usually revolves around a mix of video games,
movies, over-sized bongs and a stash of Oreos and Cheez Whiz.
The problem is that today’s federal drug laws are still
couched in the antiquated culture of “Reefer Madness.”
The federal Controlled Substances Act makes marijuana a
“Schedule I” drug with no legitimate medical
properties.
And public attitude toward the use of marijuana is similarly
tainted by the residue of the huge government propaganda campaigns
waged throughout the 20th century.
With the end of UCLA Safety Awareness Week, I decided to have a
look through the history of the criminalization of marijuana, and
it seems there has never been a genuine medical reason for making
it illegal ““ bearing in mind that alcohol and tobacco are
legal.
When Mexicans first brought the drug over the border in the
early 20th century, rumors abounded that it gave the foreigners
superhuman powers.
After the resulting El Paso ban in 1914, the federal government
got in on the act and created the Federal Bureau of Narcotics,
putting at the helm a man who would shape American drug policy for
the next 30 years and probably longer. His name was Harry J.
Anslinger, a law and order evangelist who was an avid proponent of
prohibition.
The anti-marijuana propaganda he espoused was intense and
completely unsubstantiated by empirical study. The main thrust was
that, in the words of Anslinger, “Marijuana is an addictive
drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality and
death.” And even funnier to lazy stoners around the world,
“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history
of mankind.”
The government’s pseudo-scientific support came from James
C. Munch, a pharmacologist at Temple University. The transcript of
his statement to the Advisory Committee sounds like a kid who has
come back to science class high after the lunch break and is trying
to hold down a conversation with his teacher.
Munch tells them that “the effects on dogs are extremely
variable,” and that in many cases dogs can actually go insane
(gasp!) “within three months.” The interlocutor had to
calmly remind Munch that “we are more concerned with human
beings than with animals.”
But progress has been made since those times. California
legalized the medical use of marijuana in 1996, and attitudes are
slowly softening and the benign nature of marijuana is becoming
harder to ignore ““ especially when people with AIDS,
rheumatism and many other ailments profess to the drug’s
benefits.
And the cutting edge of medical research into the effects of
marijuana is actually happening right here at UCLA.
Professor Donald P. Tashkin, medical director of the Pulmonary
Function Laboratory at UCLA, has been studying the effects of
marijuana on the respiratory and immune system for over 20 years.
He told me that 20 percent of marijuana users have chronic
bronchitis and 33 percent have a wheeze.
But tobacco smokers are much more likely to develop emphysema.
Tashkin says he does “not favor a general
legalization,” but he accepts that its effects are only as
dangerous as tobacco, albeit in different areas. He contends that
tobacco is already “grandfathered in.”
Holland provides a good case study for what happens when
marijuana is legalized. Research by the Netherlands Institute of
Mental Health and Addiction ““ the Trimbos Institute ““
suggests that relaxing marijuana laws may not necessarily lead to a
long-term rise in use.
I have been to Amsterdam on three separate occasions and
it’s not like you might imagine. The Dutch people just get on
with their everyday lives, and many don’t smoke their
country’s most famous commodity. A large majority of the
coffee shops are filled with THC tourists from England slouched in
a dark corner squinting at the floor.
But what are the penalties for those unlucky enough to be caught
having a blaze? I rang the UCLA police department to find out its
policy on marijuana use. Sgt. Sarah Karafelaf told me some useful
information for all the wily stoners reading.
If you have over one ounce on you ““ 28.5 grams ““
that counts as a “bookable offence” and you can
conceivably be put in jail. Under that, you only get a
“citable offense,” which apparently is the “same
as a parking ticket.”
Obviously, though, if it’s all bagged up and ready to be
sold, that’s a felony, and jail time is a near certainty. The
most depressing thing is when I asked her about the frequency with
which they pick up smokers on campus, she told me, “I
don’t have specific statistics, but it’s fairly
common.”
Marijuana has its faults and should not be abused ““ much
like tobacco and alcohol ““ but it’s a way of life for
many perfectly good and upstanding citizens.
The current laws are outdated and continue to make criminals out
of a whole section of society who should no longer have to put up
with being frowned upon. The alternative is surely “Reefer
Madness.”
Kennard is a third-year history student. E-mail him at
mkennard@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to
viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.