University of Maryland’s student newspaper, The Retriever Weekly has just run a story called A Brief History of Marijuana Laws Across America. The piece provides an overview of how both industrial hemp and its narcotic counterpart (not the same plant) were used throughout American history, and in doing so, shows how a struggle to outlaw the latter debilitated the cultivation of the latter. An excerpt:
Hemp (cannabis sativa) was first planted in America by Puritans in the 16th century. In the 17th century, the U.S. government encouraged farmers to grow hemp to be used for ropes, sails, and clothes. Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Ben Franklin all grew hemp and were proponents of its usefulness. The Constitution was even drafted by Thomas Jefferson on paper made from hemp.[...]
The fear created by sensational news stories [in the 1920s and 1930s] led to the proposal of the “Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.” Introduced by the “drug czar” Harry Anslinger, the act levied a modest tax on people who grew and sold hemp or cannabis. Although the tax was not significant, the regulations were complicated and a violation could be punished by five years in prison and a $2,000 fine. This discouraged the production of hemp and cannabis. Before the act, there were about 15,000 square kilometers of hemp being grown in America. Two years afterwards, the number decreased significantly to 1,700 square kilometers.
Overall, the original piece is a short and interesting read. Where it please for reform, however, is on the basis of what marijuana law enforcement costs taxpayers, rather than what industrial hemp could do for the economy, the environment, and the human race as a whole.
You see, legally distinguishing between the two plants can be done, and is done effectively in countries such as Canada and France. Where pro-hemp lobbyists should be starting from, then, is the economic and industrial potential of hemp — such as the HIA does in its efforts.
There is still too much stigma around the cannabis plant to reasonably expect both hemp and marijuana to be jointly legalized and regulated. By distinguishing the two, however, people and the economy can begin to start benefiting from, well, the benefits of industrial hemp.
For those who really want to see the decriminalization of psycho-active marijuana, after a generation has grown up eating, wearing, and burning industrial hemp products, there chances will probably be a lot better. After all, once the population (and their elected legislators) get used to how innocuous industrial hemp is, they might be willing to reconsider the regulated use of its psycho-active cousin.
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 0 comments… add one now }