Pubdate: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 Source: Alaska Dispatch News (AK) Contact: 2014 Alaska Dispatch Publishing Website: http://www.adn.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/18 Note: Anchorage Daily News until July '14(AK) Author: Paul Armantano Note: Paul Armentano is the deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and is the co-author of the book, "Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink?" ALASKANS OUGHT TO VOTE 'YES' TO REGULATE MARIJUANA Regulation and education are effective and proven alternatives to the prohibition of tobacco and alcohol, and Alaskans have a chance this November to do the same for marijuana. Despite over 70 years of federal prohibition, millions of Americans are currently purchasing and consuming marijuana. But only in the states of Colorado and Washington are these transactions legal, regulated, and taxed. In these two states, consumers have the ability to purchase a product that is of known quality and potency and that is appropriately packaged and labeled. The seller is not a black-market dealer; rather, he or she is a paid employee of a licensed business explicitly authorized to engage in such transactions. The profits from these transactions bring fiscal benefits to the local community, not the black-market economy. For decades public officials, such as the Alaska Peace Officers Association ("Legal marijuana comes at a price," September 28), have warned that regulating cannabis production, sales, and consumption was a practical impossibility and that any significant change in marijuana policy would lead to a plethora of unintended consequences. Yet the initial experience in Colorado and Washington, in addition to many other states' deep-rooted experiences regulating the production and distribution of marijuana for therapeutic purposes, have shown these fears to be misplaced. For example, neither the imposition of statewide medical marijuana legalization nor the establishment of dispensaries is associated with increases in violent crimes, burglary, or property crimes, according to a pair of recently published scientific studies. The first, a federally commissioned analysis appearing in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, determined that there are "no observed associations between the density of medical marijuana dispensaries and either violent or property crime rates." The second paper, published earlier this year in PLoS One, concluded that legalizing medical marijuana access at the state level "is not predictive of higher crime rates and may be related to reductions in rates of homicide and assault." Similarly, in the city and county of Denver, overall violent crime and property crimes have fallen by 9 percent in the first six-months following the city's decision to regulate retail marijuana outlets. Liberalized marijuana laws are also not predictive of upticks in overall cannabis use by young people. Writing in the Journal of Adolescent Health in April, researchers at Rhode Island Hospital and Brown University determined, "(O)ur study of self-reported marijuana use by adolescents in states with a medical marijuana policy compared with a sample of geographically similar states without a policy does not demonstrate increases in marijuana use among high school students that may be attributed to the policies." Likewise, state survey data released in August by the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment found that fewer high-school students in the state consumed cannabis in 2013 as compared to 2011. (Marijuana legalization went into effect in Colorado in 2012 although retail sales of cannabis to adults did not begin until January 1, 2014.) According to the survey, the percentage of high-schoolers who reported using marijuana within the past 30 days fell from 22 percent in 2011 to 20 percent in 2013 -- a percentage that is below the national average. In short, state officials can regulate cannabis in a manner that satisfies the seller, the consumer, and the taxman - and the sky won't fall. In fact, just the opposite is true. Regulations, such as age restrictions for consumers and licensing requirements for commercial producers and merchants, are effective and proven alternatives to prohibition. For instance, the public's overall consumption of alcohol and tobacco, and young people's use in particular, now stand at historic lows. According to recent federal government figures, alcohol consumption within the past 30 days among young people has fallen from 70 percent of 12th graders in 1980 to 40 percent today. Monthly tobacco use among 12th graders has similarly plunged, from nearly 40 percent in the late 1970s to just 16 percent today. These results have not been achieved by imposing blanket criminalization upon society, but rather by regulation and public education. Public officials should welcome the opportunity to bring these necessary and long overdue controls to the cannabis market. A pragmatic regulatory framework that allows for the legal, licensed commercial production and retail sale of cannabis to adults but restricts its use among young people -- coupled with a legal environment that fosters open, honest dialogue between parents and children about cannabis' potential harms -- best reduces the risks associated with the plant's use or abuse. To continue to criminalize the marijuana plant and to arrest and prosecute those adults who consume it responsibly is a disproportionate public policy response to what, at worst, is a public health concern, but not a criminal justice issue. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom