Decriminalization essentially means that a given activity no longer qualifies as criminal conduct and can only be treated as a civil infraction, but that activity is unregulated. Legalization ultimately means the ability to lawfully regulate a given activity, as well as the fact that that activity is no longer considered criminal conduct. Decriminalizing drugs leaves the crooks with the cash. Decriminalization is NOT enough when it comes to marijuana.
Over million Americans nationally have used marijuana despite prohibition, and one in ten — according to current government survey data — use it regularly.
The criminal prohibition of marijuana has not dissuaded anyone from using marijuana or reduced its availability; however, the strict enforcement of this policy has adversely impacted the lives and careers of millions of people who simply elected to use a substance to relax that is objectively safer than alcohol.
NORML believes that the time has come to amend criminal prohibition and replace it with a system of legalization, taxation, regulation, and education.
Prohibition promotes disrespect for the law, and reinforces ethnic and generation divides between the public and law enforcement. There are many models of regulation; depending on the substance being regulated these regulations can be very loose apples, tomatoes or very strict alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs The alcohol model of regulation: Commercial production is limited to licensed producers though non-retail, home production is also allowed Quality control and potency is regulated by the state, and the potency of the product is made publicly available to the consumer Retail sale of the product is limited to state licensed distributors liquor stores, restaurants, bars, package stores, etc.
The state imposes strict controls on who may obtain the product no minorswhere they may legally purchase it package store, liquor store, etc.
Ideally, such a regulatory scheme for marijuana would maintain the existing controls that presently govern commercial alcohol production, distribution, and use — while potentially imposing even stricter limits regarding the commercialization, advertising, and mass marketing of the product. India prior to Federal government imposed no national criminal prohibitions on marijuana cultivation, production, sale, possession, consumption, or commerce prior to the mid s "The incidence of the habit as estimated In some cases these drugs not only do not lead to it, but actually act as deterrents.
We have already observed that one of the important actions of these drugs is to quiet and stupefy the individual so that there is no tendency to violence, as is not infrequently found in cases of alcoholic intoxication. San Francisco respondents were three times more likely to report being able to purchase other illicit drugs from their cannabis sources.
Our findings cast doubt on such attributions. Despite widespread lawful availability of cannabis in Amsterdam, there were no differences between the 2 cities Amsterdam and San Francisco in age at onset of use, age at first regular use, or age at the start of maximum use.
Our findings do not support claims that criminalization reduces cannabis use and that decriminalization increases cannabis use" American Journal of Public Health, "The Dutch experience Consistent with other studies of the liberalization of cannabis laws, medical cannabis laws do not appear to increase use of the drug.
Europe Spain, Italy, Portugal, Luxemburg, etc. Yet American has the highest rates of cocaine and marijuana use in the world, and while most of the E. The Netherlands, with a less criminally punitive approach to cannabis use than the U.
Clearly, by itself, a punitive policy towards possession and use accounts for limited variation in national rates of illegal drug use. These results are broadly in accord with our earlier analysis of trends in cannabis use in Australia.
They are also consistent with the results of similar analysis in the United States and the Netherlands. National Academy of Science, "The available evidence indicates that the decriminalization of marijuana possession had little or no impact on rates of use.
Although rates of marijuana use increased in those U. There were also no discernible impacts on the health care systems. The data show no evidence of any increase, relative to the control states, in the proportion of the age group who ever tried marijuana.
In fact, both groups of experimental states showed a small, cumulative net decline in annual prevalence after decriminalization" U. There is no evidence that the decriminalization of marijuana by certain states or the deprioritization of marijuana enforcement in Seattle and other municipalities caused an increase in marijuana use or related problems.
This conclusion is consistent with the findings of numerous studies indicating that the increasing enforcement of marijuana laws has little impact on marijuana use rates and that the decriminalization of marijuana in U.Home» Marijuana Decriminalization Versus Legalization: A Difference That Matters Marijuana Decriminalization Versus Legalization: A Difference That Matters.
By Canna Law Blog on July 1, A great article highlighting the staggering differences between .
Decriminalization versus legalization: marijuana advocates scrutinize competing plans for reform The differences between decriminalization and legalization are relevant to more British.
Although the goal of creating laws against drug use to stop people from using potentially harmful substances is a worthy goal, that mandate would be better fulfilled by counselors, treatment facilities, and other forms of infrastructure. 5. Decriminalization isn’t the same as legalization.
while representing a level of drug enforcement intermediate between legalization and strict prohibition, is really sort of a “third way” in terms of its relationship to the economic theory. Under a decriminalization regime, the use of drugs and their possession for personal use are.
Legalization becomes complicated in the US, as cannabis can be legalized at a state level, while federal law does not recognize this legislation. Decriminalization Unlike legalization, decriminalization means that an activity is still illegal, but enforcement and penalties are not as severe.
So the difference between decriminalization and legalization nothing, everything, it all depends on the rules and initiativeblog.coml what you wish for, as you ride on your Trojan-horse named “legalization”, all legalization is not created equally.