Urdedpal
New Member
<img align="left" src="https://www.420times.com/gallery/files/2/4/Bong.gif" border="0" style="margin-right:6px" alt="" width="80" height="80" />As with most modern social issues, universities are at the forefront of the controversy. At several campuses, including UT, students are passing referendums in an attempt to reduce the penalties for possessing marijuana. The initiative is headed by the Colorado-based group SAFER (Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation). SAFER wants universities to consider marijuana the same as alcohol when determining campus discipline. This is a policy that should come to pass at Texas A&M.
Both sides have distorted the facts about marijuana, but one thing is clear: Marijuana, though not harmless, is a heck of a lot safer than alcohol. According to the Annual Review of Public Health in 2005, alcohol is the cause for about 1,700 deaths each year among college students. Marijuana, however, is impossible to overdose on, and no records exist of someone dying due to cannabis alone.
As long as it is done outside, students are allowed to use tobacco without fear, even though the dangers of tobacco use are well documented. A student who tries to smoke marijuana outside, however, is not only in violation of the law, but can also be arrested by A&M, suspended or expelled. At A&M, a student under 21 possessing alcohol may receive a fine, community service, alcohol awareness education or both for a first offense. The first-time offense for possession of marijuana results in at least suspension. There is something hypocritical here. Why not a fine or awareness education for marijuana use? Alcohol is clearly more dangerous than marijuana. It's akin to giving someone a hand grenade, and then withholding a firecracker under the guise of "safety."
Students don't come to A&M looking for a babysitter. It's tempting to argue that because marijuana possession is against the law, it is the University's responsibility to punish offenders. This belief is not true. Last June, the Supreme Court decided in the case Raich v Ashcroft that a California law allowing for medicinal marijuana was not unconstitutional. The users of the marijuana could still be held accountable to federal law, but the state did not have an obligation to punish them. This same logic could be applied to the policy here. A&M is not a police entity and is not obligated to administer punishment on top of what the law provides. If the University feels that certain offenders are an actual threat, then it could always turn them over to the police, but suspension or expulsion on top of jail time and fines is unnecessary and excessive.
Perhaps the University looks to deter usage of the drug through threats of discipline, but history has proven this method to be inadequate. According to the University of Amsterdam, acute and long-term marijuana usage in the Netherlands is half that of America's. In the Netherlands, marijuana is legal and easily available.
A quick search on Facebook.com turns up hundreds of admitted marijuana users at A&M. These students are not cowed by the University's double standard regarding alcohol and cannabis. Common sense suggests that there are more users under the radar undeterred by A&M's student rules.
A more relaxed and prudent policy would allow these students to walk with a bit more ease on campus, and let them focus on more important, ultimately academic, matters.
Kevin Alexander
The boys from Oklahoma roll it all wrong. Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong made a movie career out of it. A former president of the United States smoked it without inhaling. It's marijuana, one of the most commonly used illegal drugs in the United States.
Recently, there has been a push on several college campuses across the nation to equalize penalties for marijuana possession and underage alcohol offenses. Because the University of Texas is one of these schools, the same debate has been raised here in College Station.
First, marijuana is an illegal substance, which automatically elevates the severity of punishment for possession. True, alcohol is illegal to possess for a minor, but the legality of alcohol consumption is based simply on age. Alcohol is not illegal in the same sense as marijuana. Marijuana is a prohibited substance, not legal at any age, so it simply isn't rational to equalize penalties for the two.
In the eyes of the law, possession of marijuana is a more severe offense than a minor in possession of alcohol, so school rules shouldn't be any different. It is important that colleges keep rules consistent with those of the real world.
Furthermore, Texas A&M is a state funded university, so its rules should absolutely coincide with state laws. Equalizing the penalties for these infractions would not be a wise decision for an institution that relies on funding from a state government with different views.
The propositions at UT and other schools don't call for stiffer alcohol penalties, only lighter punishments for marijuana users. This would send the wrong message to students. If the rules were changed in such a manner, it would undoubtedly make the possession of marijuana seem like a less severe crime. The only thing this would do is increase marijuana use among students.
Proponents of the rule change say that student surveys passed at UT and Florida State University show the student body would want to lessen the penalty for possession of marijuana. They go on to say that university administrations should take note and change their policies. These demands are good for a laugh, but nothing more. The surveys did show that a majority of students at these schools wanted the change, but unfortunately students don't get to make the rules.
The fact that most students want the rules changed is not a valid reason to change them. If student surveys were the law of the land, A&M would offer beer pong as a kinesiology class, and no one would pay tuition.
The most common argument for the equalization of punishments for marijuana and underage alcohol offenses is that marijuana is safer than alcohol. This is completely preposterous. People under the influence of marijuana are just as dangerous to themselves and others as someone using alcohol. Both substances impair coordination and cause users to make decisions they otherwise would avoid. Whether or not marijuana is more dangerous is not the question the University faces. The real issue here is that students are asking college administrations to lighten the punishment for an illegal drug.
No matter what trendy phrases and witty acronyms are used to support this proposition, universities should not consider lessening the punishment for the possession of marijuana. This is just an example of a well-spoken group of college students attempting to get rules changed so they can light one up in their resident halls without consequence.
Travis Holland
Complete Title: High and Dry: Should Universities Ease Penalties for Marijuana Possession?
Source: Battalion, The (Texas A&M U, TX Edu)
Published: March 29, 2006
Copyright: 2006 The Battalion
Website: thebatt.com | Serving Texas A&M since 1893
Both sides have distorted the facts about marijuana, but one thing is clear: Marijuana, though not harmless, is a heck of a lot safer than alcohol. According to the Annual Review of Public Health in 2005, alcohol is the cause for about 1,700 deaths each year among college students. Marijuana, however, is impossible to overdose on, and no records exist of someone dying due to cannabis alone.
As long as it is done outside, students are allowed to use tobacco without fear, even though the dangers of tobacco use are well documented. A student who tries to smoke marijuana outside, however, is not only in violation of the law, but can also be arrested by A&M, suspended or expelled. At A&M, a student under 21 possessing alcohol may receive a fine, community service, alcohol awareness education or both for a first offense. The first-time offense for possession of marijuana results in at least suspension. There is something hypocritical here. Why not a fine or awareness education for marijuana use? Alcohol is clearly more dangerous than marijuana. It's akin to giving someone a hand grenade, and then withholding a firecracker under the guise of "safety."
Students don't come to A&M looking for a babysitter. It's tempting to argue that because marijuana possession is against the law, it is the University's responsibility to punish offenders. This belief is not true. Last June, the Supreme Court decided in the case Raich v Ashcroft that a California law allowing for medicinal marijuana was not unconstitutional. The users of the marijuana could still be held accountable to federal law, but the state did not have an obligation to punish them. This same logic could be applied to the policy here. A&M is not a police entity and is not obligated to administer punishment on top of what the law provides. If the University feels that certain offenders are an actual threat, then it could always turn them over to the police, but suspension or expulsion on top of jail time and fines is unnecessary and excessive.
Perhaps the University looks to deter usage of the drug through threats of discipline, but history has proven this method to be inadequate. According to the University of Amsterdam, acute and long-term marijuana usage in the Netherlands is half that of America's. In the Netherlands, marijuana is legal and easily available.
A quick search on Facebook.com turns up hundreds of admitted marijuana users at A&M. These students are not cowed by the University's double standard regarding alcohol and cannabis. Common sense suggests that there are more users under the radar undeterred by A&M's student rules.
A more relaxed and prudent policy would allow these students to walk with a bit more ease on campus, and let them focus on more important, ultimately academic, matters.
Kevin Alexander
The boys from Oklahoma roll it all wrong. Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong made a movie career out of it. A former president of the United States smoked it without inhaling. It's marijuana, one of the most commonly used illegal drugs in the United States.
Recently, there has been a push on several college campuses across the nation to equalize penalties for marijuana possession and underage alcohol offenses. Because the University of Texas is one of these schools, the same debate has been raised here in College Station.
First, marijuana is an illegal substance, which automatically elevates the severity of punishment for possession. True, alcohol is illegal to possess for a minor, but the legality of alcohol consumption is based simply on age. Alcohol is not illegal in the same sense as marijuana. Marijuana is a prohibited substance, not legal at any age, so it simply isn't rational to equalize penalties for the two.
In the eyes of the law, possession of marijuana is a more severe offense than a minor in possession of alcohol, so school rules shouldn't be any different. It is important that colleges keep rules consistent with those of the real world.
Furthermore, Texas A&M is a state funded university, so its rules should absolutely coincide with state laws. Equalizing the penalties for these infractions would not be a wise decision for an institution that relies on funding from a state government with different views.
The propositions at UT and other schools don't call for stiffer alcohol penalties, only lighter punishments for marijuana users. This would send the wrong message to students. If the rules were changed in such a manner, it would undoubtedly make the possession of marijuana seem like a less severe crime. The only thing this would do is increase marijuana use among students.
Proponents of the rule change say that student surveys passed at UT and Florida State University show the student body would want to lessen the penalty for possession of marijuana. They go on to say that university administrations should take note and change their policies. These demands are good for a laugh, but nothing more. The surveys did show that a majority of students at these schools wanted the change, but unfortunately students don't get to make the rules.
The fact that most students want the rules changed is not a valid reason to change them. If student surveys were the law of the land, A&M would offer beer pong as a kinesiology class, and no one would pay tuition.
The most common argument for the equalization of punishments for marijuana and underage alcohol offenses is that marijuana is safer than alcohol. This is completely preposterous. People under the influence of marijuana are just as dangerous to themselves and others as someone using alcohol. Both substances impair coordination and cause users to make decisions they otherwise would avoid. Whether or not marijuana is more dangerous is not the question the University faces. The real issue here is that students are asking college administrations to lighten the punishment for an illegal drug.
No matter what trendy phrases and witty acronyms are used to support this proposition, universities should not consider lessening the punishment for the possession of marijuana. This is just an example of a well-spoken group of college students attempting to get rules changed so they can light one up in their resident halls without consequence.
Travis Holland
Complete Title: High and Dry: Should Universities Ease Penalties for Marijuana Possession?
Source: Battalion, The (Texas A&M U, TX Edu)
Published: March 29, 2006
Copyright: 2006 The Battalion
Website: thebatt.com | Serving Texas A&M since 1893
