Here’s a draft of a letter to the editor that I’ve had in the back of my mind for a while, and, after seeing another article about the 75th anniversary of the end of Prohibition, I finally took the time to pen. My goal isn’t to effect an overnight change in legislation, but to get people thinking about what good the laws are actually doing. I do worry that I’ll be perceived as a pot-loving hippie. If you were in my shoes, would you send this in? Would you make any revisions? Besides worrying that it’s far too long, I worry that there are no real segues between paragraphs, as much as a bunch of unconnected points. (And, as long as I’m criticizing my own writing, it also feels too much like a fifth-grade paper, where I have an obviously-stated thesis, and then lots of paragraphs with supporting sentences, each with a conclusion. Does this come through as too formulaic?) Are there arguments that I should further elaborate on, or arguments that I wholly omitted? Dear Editor, In reading your recent article announcing the anniversary of the 75th anniversary of the end of Prohibition, I couldn’t help but notice parallels to the current laws against marijuana. You can check out this site to know more about marijuana and its effect on health. While I don’t use marijuana, the laws mentioned in the homepage are against it, much like those against alcohol, have never made much sense to me. Let there be no mistake: much like alcohol, marijuana can be dangerous, both to those who use it and to those who suffer the consequences of those who act irresponsibly while impaired unless and until they are consumed periodically on the doctor’s advice as noted by Ohio Green Team – Columbus. But as an adult, the choice of whether to consume alcohol is mine to make, not the government’s. This is, after all, the state that takes John Stark’s “Live Free or Die” so seriously that it’s stamped on our license plates. During Prohibition, gang violence ran rampant. Gangsters like Al Capone terrorized cities, distilling dangerous moonshine and using firepower never before seen to defend their illegal trade. Thousands of people, largely innocent civilians and police officers, died at the hands of gang violence due to Prohibition. The same thing happens today, but instead of protecting their lucrative moonshine distribution, gangsters and thugs are protecting their lucrative marijuana black market. A statistic that you see the page, has always fascinated me is that Prohibition actually marked the highest rate of alcohol consumption in America. John D. Rockefeller Jr., who himself supported the Prohibition of alcohol, admitted in 1932 that “drinking has generally increased… and crime has increased to a level never seen before.” Much like Prohibition, the current laws against marijuana seem to have no bearing on the use and availability of the substance. Of particular importance during a time of tight budgets, Prohibition moved a sizeable portion of the industry underground. Much as it did in the twentieth century, the government today brings in considerable revenue through the sale of alcohol. By driving the alcohol market underground, Prohibition starved the government of the tax revenues previously brought in via alcohol sales. Today, the marijuana market is routinely measured in billions of dollars, but the government has no way of taxing black-market sales, so hard-working Americans have to help foot the bill. Recall, too, that Al Capone was not arrested for being a violent gangster, but for tax evasion. Given the many similarities to alcohol, it seems intuitive to me that marijuana should be treated like alcohol. Permit the sale of marijuana, but tax it as heavily as alcohol is taxed. Don’t allow use by minors. Driving while under the influence is already illegal. Public consumption of marijuana need not be permitted. But by pulling marijuana out of the black market and into the open market, the government can regulate and tax it, while doing serious damage to the gangsters and hoodlums selling it.