Editor’s note: This commentary is by Vidda Crochetta, who is a longtime hemp and marijuana activist. He is the author of “Boomers’ War,” a novel about the 1960’s antiwar drug and bisexual culture in Greenwich Village, New York City, where the author spent most of his adult life. He is also the cofounder of Marijuana Resolve, a Vermont group that worked for three and half years to help decriminalize marijuana that took effect in Vermont on July 6, 2013. Crochetta has lived in Brattleboro for the past eight years.
[M]any young people have an innate interest in things that make them feel good and glow with an almost excited delirium for life. They ride on a peak of being interested in everything, and, as with each to their own abilities, most of them decelerate to a variety of moderate behaviors throughout their lives. It’s why the meaning of “live and let live” fits most American lifestyles the best.
Unfortunately, the few who cannot decelerate become a lawfully prescribed criminalizing template for the rest of us. It is those marginal drug “addicts” who drive legislatures to make laws for “all” of us. No matter that the majority of drug “consumers” are largely working, responsible people throughout our social and class strata.
In the main, those adults who decelerated to moderate behavior want to be left alone. So why are moderates lumped in with the drug addicts?
Where are the laws for moderates? Why have our legislators turned moderates, who constitute the majority of Americans, into criminals, when they do not engage in criminal intent or activities, except those consensual behaviors that are arbitrarily made unlawful by a few government mortals?
The host of associated problems with marijuana use is that it is contaminated by the fact that Americans consume marijuana in a largely illegal, draconian and stigmatized social environment, and, has done so over several generations. All data associated, then, with marijuana use, suffers from a boxed canyon effect where there is no way to turn to establish what really happens when people consume marijuana under legalized, socially acceptable conditions. Therefore it is impossible to realistically separate the negative claims associated with a person’s mental or physical conditions, including paranoia and psychosis patterns, under the heavy-handed life alternating effects of criminalization. Legislatures and the criminal justice system can be seen as a major instigator of associated problems with marijuana use, not necessarily the impartial arbiter of the identification and resolution of them.
To date, however, I have never known prevention groups to discuss the brains of people over 30. Are they trying to redefine the age of what is a legally acceptable adult?
A group of Vermonters, who support an “endowed lobbyist” organization called Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), opposes marijuana legalization. Patrick Kennedy, SAM co-founder, is reported as saying his “battles with drug-addiction led him to oppose the legalization of marijuana.” Regrettably, wealthy Mr. Kennedy is the biggest name supporter of SAM-VT.
An overlooked flaw in Patrick Kennedy’s support of keeping marijuana illegal is that, like many people who have had drug abuse problems, his position is tainted, one-sided and inadequate to the serious task of devising good laws for the full range of adult-aged marijuana consumers. Moreover, as hard-core prohibition becomes less popular, it is giving way to prevention coalitions who want us to believe that they offer a “gentler, kinder way.”
Patrick Kennedy’s group (SAM) and other so-called prevention groups claim they want to protect young people’s growing brains from the alleged harms of marijuana. SAM-VT and the other groups identify the ages of 18 to 25 as remaining a critical period of growth beyond childhood. To date, however, I have never known prevention groups to discuss the brains of people over 30. Are they trying to redefine the age of what is a legally acceptable adult? The legal age where young people are considered responsible for their own actions generally begins at 18 to 21. For that reason, when reaching the legal age of adulthood people 18 to 25 have the same legal personal choice and decision rights as any of the older adults. I would not recommend to any legislature to change that.
Both legislatures and the American public would benefit from sensible approaches to marijuana as a better alternative to smart approaches. The name “Smart Approaches” places the SAM people squarely as elitist and somewhat arrogant. Even a cursory overview of their positions indicates they are dependent on preliminary, small, and oftentimes outdated and biased studies that make it impossible to fairly and intelligently provide data that relate to brain function and behavior, and the social consequences to adult marijuana consumers in an otherwise criminalized environment.
But then again, setting aside the studies, how god-awful it must be, to be so miserable with yourself that you would advocate denying to everyone their freedom of choice … just because you couldn’t handle your own choices?
It’s unfortunate that Patrick Kennedy’s personal drug-addiction troubles led him to oppose legalizing marijuana, but no one, or any group, should tread on the right for adults to secure for themselves their intrinsic freedom of choice.
