Book Critique

I read Legalizing Marijuana by Paul Ruschmann to help better understand the issue. Ruschmann's book is written in a point and counterpoint format. Every chapter has a point and its counterpoint on the issue of marijuana legalization. In the first section Ruschmann points out that prohibition was not successful in the 1920s, so marijuana prohibition will not be successful in this day and age. He states that "Fear, ignorance, and prejudice all played a part in making marijuana illegal in this country"(Ruschmann 49). In section two he argues that Marijuana is too dangerous to be legal, since it is a newer substance to America. He counterpoints this statement by saying that the dangers of marijuana are highly exaggerated in hopes to keep Americans scared of the substance. In the next section Ruschmann goes on to explain that the enforcement of marijuana laws are uneven, ineffective and wasteful. The counterpoint is obviously that marijuana laws should be strictly enforced to preserve society and its morals. Ruschmann then continues by making a counterpoint that if America did relax marijuana laws then we would see other problems arise such as crime, death, and substance abuse. The counterpoint presented to this is that relaxing marijuana laws would make a large number of Americans happy and content with the justice system.

To be completely honest this book presented both sides of the argument for marijuana legalization equally well. I really enjoyed reading the book from the point/counterpoint format. It was like reading a debate that presented both arguments extremely well. Because I have been reading several other sources and opinions about marijuana legalization I sided more the anti- legalization while reading. I noticed Paul Ruschmann adding in his opinion every now and then throughout the book, and overall I think he is for the legalization of marijuana.

Based upon some of the comments Ruschmann made throughout the book I believe he is for the legalization. Sorry Ruschmann but I disagree with you big time on that. I agree with the chapter that said marijuana is too dangerous for its newly attracted users. I think that if marijuana laws were relaxed society would be giving in to a detrimental substance that would harm the present generation and generations to come. I was very surprised that this book did not mention much about the legalization of marijuana based on what it can be used for medically. That is typically a strong point in the pro legalization platform and it was only briefed upon in Ruschmann's book.

Ruschmann, Paul. Legalizing Marijuana. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Chelsea House Publishers, 2004. Print.

Obama's View on Marijuana Legalization

In this video Barack Obama informs the public that he is all for the use of medical marijuana. Obama states that "When it comes to medical marijuana being prescribed by doctors as an alternative treatment, I am all for it"(Obama). He does not believe that people should be able to grow it on their own for their own usage. He believes it would then be too hard to regulate. He doesn't believe legalizing marijuana should be getting much spotlight in the headlines, because there are more important issues to report on like the health care reform and the war in Iraq. He does not think Americans should be looking to have legalized marijuana any time soon.

For once, I actually agree one-hundred percent with Barack Obama! I think marijuana usage for medical purposes is a completely legitimate reason to have marijuana. I also believe that people growing it on their own would just get way too out of control for the state and federal government to control. I also do not think it should be a top priority for Americans since we still have other major issues to deal with. I now have one issue I side with Barack Obama on.

"Barack Obama and Medical Marijuana (interview Q&A)." YouTube. Web. 13 May 2010. .

Marijuana Legalization Is the New Stimulus Package

In 1996 California became one of the first states in the nation to legalize medical marijuana. There is currently 200 million dollars worth of medical marijuana sales that are subject to sales tax. Marijuana is the state of California's biggest cash crop, bringing in an average 14 billion dollars a year in sales. There is currently a bill being passed through California's state legislature by Tom Ammiano that would bring in an additional 1.3 billion a year in revenue for the state. Ammiano's bill states that California should legalize pot and allow the state to regulate and tax its sale. With unemployment down right now, this would create a new industry to bring new jobs to be filled, which would ultimately stimulate California's economy. Legalizing marijuana and thus ceasing to arrest, prosecute and imprison nonviolent offenders could save the state of California over 1 billion dollars a year. Retired Orange County Superior Court Judge James Gray states that "We couldn't make this drug any more available if we tried. Not only do we have those problems, along with glamorizing it by making it illegal, but we also have the crime and corruption that go along with it. Unfortunately, every society in the history of mankind has had some form of mind-altering, sometimes addictive substances to use, to misuse, abuse or get addicted to. Get used to it. They're here to stay. So let's try to reduce those harms, and right now we couldn't do it worse if we tried"(Gray).

First off, I see Judge James Gray's point with legalizing marijuana. It's always going to be in circulation and it makes one seem "cooler" to use if it's illegal. Especially with young adults who are looking for more acceptance among peer groups. On the contrary I still do not believe that it should be made completely legal for any use other than medicinal purposes. I think that the state should make other new stimulus packages to recessitate the failing economy. I do not think we should sink as low as to legalize marijuana to gain the state some extra cash. Giving in on the legalization of marijuana might lead to the state giving in on legalizing even more dangerous drugs just to earn more tax revenues. If the state needs money that bad maybe they should have a feed the children type concert to raise money for the state government...they could call it feed the Californians!




Stateman, Alison. "Can Marijuana Help Rescue California's Economy?." Time 13 March 2009: n. pag. Web. 15 Apr 2010. .

Marijuana Legalization Debate

During this heated debate, Baldwin pointed out a fact that did not occur to me until viewing this video. He pointed out that after marijuana smokers smoke and get high many of them will get in the car and drive putting other innocent lives at risk. Ron Paul pointed out that with prohibition many bootleg kings came into power on the black market like Al Capone, who also brought tons of crime to Chicago. If there was no prohibition than there would not be a need for these black market czars. Baldwin brought up a moral stand about smoking marijuana will be a gateway drug that leads its users into more hard drugs and alcohol abuse. Both Baldwin and Paul agree that it should be allowed for medical purposes. Paul strongly advocated that the legalization issue should be left up to the state governments not the federal one.

In this debate I believe that Stephen Baldwin made the better argument. I think the fact that it is a gateway drug and could potentially risk innocent Americans lives should be enough to make it remain illegal. I know personally that I would not want to see any of my family members be killed because someone was irresponsible while smoking marijuana and decided to drive while impaired. If making marijuana illegal will reduce car related deaths by marijuana impairment then I think it should be made illegal. If it is used for medicinal purposes then that is different, but it is not something I believe one can take their chances with all for the sake of a good time. It is the governments role to protect the people and I think that the best way they can protect the people is by keeping marijuana illegal. I think the legalization issue should be left to the federal governent to decide if it is illegal, not the state government. I literally started laughing however when Ron Paul made the comment that "I understand there are a few people who smoke marijuana already" (Paul). Well Ron...there's actually more than just a few people smoking marijuana already. Goes to show that he needed to do more research on this topic before completely making himself look like an idiot.


"Ron Paul debates Stephen Baldwin on Legalizing Marijuana on CNN Larry King 03/13/2009 ." YouTube. Web. 8 Apr 2010. .

Prohibition vs. Marijuana Being Illegal

During the 1920s Alcohol was outlawed in the United States. It lasted for a short period of time before the prohibition amendment was repealed. Speakeasies were very active during the prohibition time, and many did not let the law change their daily alcohol intake. Alcohol was still widely available on the black market, no matter what restrictions the law made. Prohibition did not work then and it is still not working today with the war on marijuana. Marijuana is still being purchased everyday by millions of Americans. Since marijuana is illegal, people are having to come in contact with dangerous dealers who sell it illegally. These same dealers are the ones who are selling more detrimental drugs, putting the everyday marijuana user at a higher risk for being offered dangerous drugs. If people were allowed to grow it themselves then they would not have to risk their safety and health just to get marijuana. Another factor in the illegal selling and purchasing of marijuana is that it is not being taxed. If the government would legalize marijuana they could take in a substantial amount of tax money because of it. Walter Block spoke on the issue of legalizing marijuana and stated that "A free market in marijuana enhances economic welfare"(Block 144). The author of my article agrees with Mr. Block and goes on to say that especially while in an economic downturn like the one we are in, legalizing marijuana could be the factor to save the economy. Overall the author wanted to get across that prohibition did not last very long and once it was repealed the economy did do better. If legalizing marijuana would take place, we might again see our economy flourish.

This article to me focuses way too much on the economic side of the legalization debate. I feel that although the economy would do better, it is not looking into the best interests of the American people to legalize solely based upon that. Alcohol is not a new substance to Americans. It was not new during prohibition either. Because marijuana is a relatively new substance in America I think more research and studies should be done on it before it is legalized. There is always going to be people who break the laws and sell substances on the black market. Because marijuana has not been legal for a very long time in the U.S. and the country isn't falling apart because of the lack of it, i do not see it necessary to legalize marijuana...even from an economic standpoint.


Thornton, Mark. "Prohibition versus Legalization: Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Drug Policy?." Independent Review 11.3 (2007): 417-433. Academic Search Elite. EBSCO. Web. 8 Apr. 2010.