BY HERMAN M. LAGON
FURTHERMORE, the legalization of marijuana could be quite important in helping to solve the opioid crisis afflicting several nations. Studies in legal states for medical marijuana have shown declining opioid prescriptions and overdose rates. This implies that cannabis might be a safer substitute for painkillers, hence maybe saving many lives.
In a nation like ours, where pain management choices are sometimes few and costly, offering a safer, more reasonably priced substitute for medical narcotics, painkillers, or analgesics could have a significant effect on public health.
Still, the debate over legalizing marijuana presents specific difficulties. Conservative and rightist groups strongly oppose the legalization of marijuana, claiming it would result in moral degradation, more drug abuse, and a host of other social problems. These issues are real and need careful thought and respect to be answered.
One often used justification against legalization is the worry that this hemp might open doors to more harmful narcotics. Research has repeatedly shown, though, that most marijuana users never advance to harder drugs. Furthermore, much as with alcohol and tobacco, the government can control the distribution of marijuana by managing the market and restricting access to minors.
On a recent trip to Bangkok, Thailand, I saw personally how a country with a cultural resemblance to ours has embraced a controlled attitude to marijuana. Operating under tight rules, dispensaries provide goods in safe and regulated surroundings. Along with lessening law enforcement’s burden, this change has created a new economic sector that helps the government and the people.
If Thailand, a nation with its own set of traditional values, can effectively implement a controlled marijuana market, then surely ours can do the same while ensuring that any possible risks are minimized by careful regulation.
From a governmental standpoint, legalizing marijuana could result in relatively significant savings. The way marijuana is currently handled—heavy policing, court cases, and incarceration—drains funds better used elsewhere.
The government could lower law enforcement’s financial and logistical load by moving from prohibition to control and concentrating on more urgent problems. This is about reallocating resources to where they can have the most major positive influence on society, not only about saving funds. (To be continued)/PN
