VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 1 POSTED ON: 5/15/2013
Friday, April 7, 1972 Dage 4 NEW UNIVERSITY less debilitating than alcohol. C.M.I, agrees that 1 regardless ol the drug in question, the dangerous conduct performed under itsinfluence is properly subject to regulationand punishment. The second paragraph expresses this principle. Campaign The campaign will stress three major themes: | the lack of any evidence that marijuanause poses a serious enough threat to anyone tobe criminally MARIJUANA punished, the tremendous costs of criminalizing use. and the value in personal freedom: 1. It will be necessary to dispell misconceptions which still persist among some Californians that marijuanais somehow related to violence,mental illness, sexual depravity, drug addiction, and INITIATIVE: motivational degeneracy. Despite a growing amount of reliable research on marijuana use. and despitea dramatic increase in marijuanause itself, these dire connections have failed to materialize;either in the laboratoryor in the so- ciety at large. All indications are that the vast majority of marijuana users consume the drug without any demonstrable harm toanyone. This is not to say that marijuana is harmless, because making it a almost any drug in sufficient doses can be dangerous. However, it is clear that given comparable doses, marijuana use has not been shown to be any more harmful than such house- hold drugs as tobacco, alcohol and coffee: and indications are that it is less harmful than any of these three. And it is equally clear that in a society like ours that values freedom, conduct should not personal and he criminal unless it can be shown to be harmful. 2. Costs of criminalization are complex and staggering: (a) Costs to taxpayersand citizens. The cost ol prosecuting the marijuana laws isa double-edged sword. Tens of millions of dollars are spent annually to arrest, prosecute, try. incarcerate, The initiative is not an endorsement of mari- juana: rather it is a recognition that the use of non-criminal and "rehabilitate" harmless marijuana users, while the police, prosecutors, courts, jails, and marijuana is a personal choice and that for the probation authorities cannot adequately handle the crimes of violence, coercion and deceit. welfare of the user,his family and friends, and the is impossible to measure in (b) llumanrosts.lt society as a whole, users should not be treated as dollars and cents the human suffering imposed criminals. upon those apprehended by police for marijuana The initiative isintended to remove all criminal penalties andcivil liabilities from personal use of marijuana in' all of its aspects from planting to choice use. and upon their families and friends. To the apprehended user (who. in the majority of cases, has had no prior criminal record) the arrest, pre- consumption. The meaning of personal use is trial incarceration, bail-bond application, and intended to be broad enough to accord the same court proceedings are very expensive, terrifying non-commercial freedoms to marijuanausers as — and demeaning.The experience whether or not are enjoyedby alcohol and tobacco users, such as federal law. it results in a jail sentence — seriously disrupts the freedom to preparequantities for personaIuse The second paragraph actually adds nothing to career, education, family, friendships, and lifein and freedom to share it at parties or among the legal effect of the petition. It was included to allay the anxieties regarding reckless drivingand general. Even a short jail sentence will expose the friends. However, the initiative' does not effect marijuanauser to a world of vastly more serious existing statutes regarding sale, possession for other reckless conduct performed under the in- fluence of marijuana. And. although the weight of drug use and crime: and a criminal record sale and other activities associated with sale. research indicates that marijuanais significantly seriously impedes his ability to find work. which remain criminal under both state and newUmversity Newport.Beach, Second class postage paia\ dear ronnie CO. 92660. Please address ail Utters and mam*sa4>ti to The New V&ereUm. 3r4 Floor Commons. , Umtoarsum of California, mi**. Co. 9Zt€4. All opinions e&ressed are ihose of the im- dtviduai wrUeiish at* mot uecetsarilw ttos* ; of the New UuiversUw. the ASVCt. or the I Umtversitw of CaUfond^ ' Question: You complainconstantly about druu public service or organizedresearch programs of '\ Vol. 4 /No. 32/Tuesaay, February 22, 1972 abuse, yet when it comes down to doing some- the University. New Vuioersitw is published twice- Tke thing about it, you don't. In fact, you stand in the — Question: Could you define "rehabilitation" as ■ ' weekly os Tuesdaw ami Fridaw tke owXn way of solving the problem why did you kill it relates to our California prisons and comment mouths Of October. November. Febrmart. ... expansionof the mcthadonc program a proven on the effectiveness of the present system and the — Kay 1 April and Mam; the lirsi week bj Decembc. March ami Hoe; and the last three weeks of 1 solution to heroin addiction? In addition, why did changes you might consider necessary? ' you veto money for the University of California Wiekett, Seripps b* the Communications Boar* of Drug Abuse Information project? Ken Reagan: I would say that an ex-felon is "reha- , Jmwarw the Associated Students of the UutversttM Rosenfield, (,'laremont bilitated" when he isable to consistently obeythe , of California. Irvine. Reagan: California is doing more than any laws of this society, deal with the stresses and other state to combat the drug abuse problem. strains of lifeina sociallyacceptablemanner,and Our approach has been a comprehensive one. to provide for himself to thebest of his ability.Our Nowrttaoamt*- mam subscribe to the New Uwh including the area of education, law enforce- prison system has dozens of programs to help its versUv at a coat of $2.00 mar quarter. ment, research, treatment and rehabilitation. We inmatesachieve this. Theseprograms rangefrom have appropriated large sums of money lor vocational and academic training to psychologi- THE 8TAFF: Rick Teplltz and Bob Good- fact, have support- cal and psychiatric counselling. However many win, co-editors; Pam Lelstner, managing methadone programs and. in ed legislation to permit the creation andimprove- programs a prison system makes available, the "attor, Bill Betts, associate editor; Mike ment of methadone programs. Hut methadone is inmate must himself decide that he is going to Kreutzer, business manager; Bill Half man, not a panacea to the narcotic problem. change his way of life. Until the inmate makes advertising manager; Lee Solow, editorial The bill I vetoed, in my opinion,placed respon- that decision, all attempts at "rehabilitation" will director, Mark Northcross, news research sibility for the supervision of methadone fail. director; Kathy McKerma, campus news ed- programs in the wrong agency, and appropriated Although our prison system is among the most itor, Dave Wilson, fine arts editor, Dave vast sums of money lor programs which experts progressive in the world, thereare alwaysways in Johnson, sports editor; Robert 'sliten; in the field were unwillingto say were necessary. which to improve it.TheI imitationsof this column photo editor, LeeAnn Whites and Laura Ud- We are. at this time, doing a study of the effec- do not permit me to go into detail on the improve- denberg, women's editors; Rick Sakal, pro- tiveness of methadone programs and will this ments we are now instituting. Some of our major year propose a comprehensive drug abuse treat- innovations have been the family visiting and duction advisor; STAFF: Ken Bentley, work furlough programs. Also, the probation Mark Reslg, Mark Weber, Chuck Nachand. ment program which will include methadone Larry Shyer, Roxanna Poe, Sue Josephs, treatment. subsidy programhas helped to reduce our prison The University of California Drug Abuse Infor- population far below that when Itook office. We Wendy Lot land, Don Sumnlchl, 81u Altshu* mation Project appropriation was cut from are always appreciative of suggestions as to how ler, Mike Carnahanr Sue 8tuller, Jeff Ja- $80,000 to $10,000 because project officials them- to make our prison rehabilitation programs more cobs, Lorrle Reuter, Steve Sllverman, selves told us that $10,000 would keep the project successful. Oin- hope would be that our efforts to Mark Zakarln, Diane Isenberg; ART going as it had in the past. The balance of the rehabilitate those committed to the state prison STAFF: Rob Sawcnuck, Brad Oonenfeld, system '\ill ultimately make most of our prisons appropriation was to be used for undefined unnecessary. John. Blair, Pete Williams, Jerry Wood- research and evaluation proposals. Financial ward. Noel Patton, and Jim Thrasher. support [or these proposals could havecome from Address all letters to: P.O. Box 601. Claremont. the substantial funds already appropriated for Calif. 01711
"newUmversity - New University"