Some thoughts on the demon weed

What I’m about to say will probably get me in trouble, so let me start with some damage control.

Although the musings to follow were obviously triggered by the recent drug bust at Amherst County High School, this is not specifically about that. At the moment, marijuana is illegal in this country, and the local cops were just doing their jobs. Also, the kids who were charged haven’t had their day in court yet.

Nor am I saying that marijuana is good for you, or even that it’s not bad for you. My question is whether we need to be protected from it, especially at the high cost in money, time and wrecked lives that such protection currently requires.

It’s not a question you’re likely to hear debated in political campaigns this fall, especially local ones — pot legalization is one of those “third rail” issues that most candidates shrink from touching.

Just ask Barbara Pryor, whose House of Delegates campaign against Vance Wilkins in Amherst County back in the ’90s took a nose dive when she mentioned that maybe the demon cannabis wasn’t all that bad.

Still, whether you call it marijuana, pot, weed, smoke or reefer, this ubiquitous plant has sewn its seeds in the topsoil of American culture. When Bill Clinton famously said he’d tried it but didn’t inhale, that comment was greeted not with outrage, but with knowing snickers. If you grew up during the ’60s and ’70s, chances are you had friends who did inhale, even if you didn’t yourself.

It’s not going away, and it’s everywhere.

I like the proposal that has been suggested by people like William F. Buckley, not exactly a wild-eyed liberal: Sell pre-packaged marijuana joints in state liquor stores, where the content and the strength of it can be regulated, and where the state can collect the tax money. You have to be 21 to use it. You can’t drive under the influence of it. Anyone selling it as a freelancer will be treated the same as a bootlegger, but it will no longer be a felony to sell or possess pot.

This would also serve the purpose of separating marijuana from such societal plagues as crack cocaine and crystal meth. I still don’t understand the logic of locking drug addicts away for following an unhealthy lifestyle, but neither do I think the state should provide hard drugs to its citizens.

By contrast, marijuana is legal in some parts of Amsterdam, and the last time I checked, the country of the Netherlands hadn’t dissolved into a drug-addled la la land. It still seems to be functioning quite well.

It can’t be good to draw large amounts of smoke into your lungs, but cigarettes are legal. It can’t be good to routinely alter your brain chemistry for laughs, but alcohol is legal. Of course, while there are probably marijuana lobbyists prowling the halls of Congress, they obviously don’t have as much clout as the cigarette and liquor lobbies.

I’d like to see an in-depth study done on marijuana that doesn’t have an agenda attached to it, for either side. What are the health risks, not just in and of itself, but compared to alcohol and tobacco?

More importantly, maybe we need to learn ways to relax and cope with life that do not involve the ingestion of any sort of chemical, legal or illegal. Wouldn’t it be great if the “war on drugs” became a moot point?