Have concerns over legalizing recreational marijuana? Fear not

Monday, Oct. 24, 2016 | 2 a.m.

The War on Drugs doesn’t have a lot of defenders left, and with good reason.

It’s been a decadeslong disaster, leading to overcrowded jails and prisons, a shameful legacy of incarcerating blacks at a far higher rate than people of other ethnicities and little if any reduction in the demand for drugs.

Nevadans have a chance to make meaningful progress by voting to legalize the recreational use of marijuana.

We encourage them to vote yes.

To explain why, we’ll offer answers to key concerns.

• • •

Opponents: Given that marijuana is already legal for medicinal purposes in Nevada, why take this next step?

Response: Several reasons. At the most basic level, it doesn’t make sense to keep directing limited law enforcement resources at low-level marijuana offenses. Regulating the production and sale of the drug would generate tax revenue and economic activity (more than $1.1 billion, according to one study), create jobs (nearly 29,000 have been created by Colorado’s cannabis industry) and broaden the avenues for users to purchase the drug legally instead of from criminals.

• • •

Opponents: Considering all of the social problems we battle tied to alcohol consumption, legalizing another substance doesn’t make sense.

Response: Marijuana is far less harmful to the body. It’s less addictive, and there’s never been a single overdose death recorded. And while alcohol is associated with violence and aggression, that’s not the case with marijuana.

• • •

Opponents: Legalizing will create problems in the workplace — people coming to work high or smoking pot while on the job — and could discourage companies from locating in Nevada.

Response: The ballot initiative addresses this concern by specifically allowing employers to craft their own policies on drug testing. And if employees are worried about it, they’re certainly not showing it in Colorado, where the economy is booming and unemployment was less than 4 percent in August.

• • •

Opponents: What about people driving while high?

Response: A valid concern. There are studies showing an increase in the number of drivers involved in fatalities in Colorado and Washington with marijuana in their systems. But in those studies, it’s not indicated whether the drivers were impaired or at fault. Additionally, the Colorado Department of Transportation study did not cite marijuana use among significant contributing factors in data from 2015 traffic fatalities. Alcohol was on that list, as were distracted driving, dangerous motorcycle riding and failure to use safety belts.

• • •

Opponents: The ballot question is all about creating a market for Big Marijuana — corporations that will exploit consumers like the tobacco industry has done.

Response: So we should continue letting cartels and street gangs have exclusive control of the market? Look, people will definitely profit off of marijuana if Nevada legalizes it. But that’s the same with any product. The difference is that the businesses selling it legally, unlike black marketeers, would be subject to state regulations on both production and sales.

• • •

Opponents: But there’s still a black market for marijuana in places where it’s been legalized.

Response: True. And there probably always will be, since there’s still a black market for legal goods such as jewelry, guns and even alcohol. But just as most consumers choose to buy merchandise from legal businesses, it’s reasonable to assume that most marijuana users will turn to legit sources. As the drug becomes legal in more and more places, the black market will lose more and more of its grip on the industry.

• • •

Opponents: Making marijuana easier to obtain will make it more available to children.

Response: The availability to children is a legitimate concern. But the largest survey of youths in Colorado actually shows that teen use is down since legalization and sits below the national average. As for concerns about children getting into their parents’ supplies, that’s a matter of personal responsibility among adults. Children get into all sorts of things that are bad for them — cleaning supplies, over-the-counter medicines, etc. — but we don’t ban those products. We rely on parents to keep them secure.

• • •

Opponents: Yeah, but marijuana is also sold in edible products like brownies and candies, which kids are sure to eat if they find them.

Response: Ah, the “gummy bear” argument, alluding to marijuana products that are virtually indistinguishable from the popular candy. That’s a real concern, too, and the state should address it by regulating packaging, shapes and types of products — as in Colorado, which recently passed legislation banning marijuana sold in the form of people, animals or fruit.

• • •

Opponents: Marijuana will be bad for tourism and conventions in Nevada. In Denver, conventiongoers have complained about an increasingly large number of vagrants who have been drawn to the downtown tourist corridor by the easy availability of marijuana.

Response: Goofy argument. Tourism and visitor spending in Colorado hit record levels in 2015. And Las Vegas isn’t Denver; conventiongoers come here expecting to see things you don’t see in Wichita. The bigger problem for Nevada would come if California and other states legalized recreational marijuana and we didn’t, which could prompt potential tourists to go elsewhere.

Editor’s note: Brian Greenspun, the CEO, publisher and editor of the Las Vegas Sun, has an ownership interest in Essence Cannabis Dispensary.