A 'chronic' ailment

There are few things more ironic than when "The Man" sticks it to, well, "The Man."Regardless of where you live, there are two versions of "The Man" in your area: the state government and the federal government. When these two entities don't get along, some funny things start happening.

Things like the legalization of marijuana, for example.

Marijuana is illegal under federal law, something few students should be shocked to hear.

What students might not know, though, is that some states have opted to bend that law a little with laws of their own.

In recent years, 13 states have enacted laws that legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Before anyone gets too excited, note that the list does not include Kentucky. And the operative words here are "medicinal purposes."

Debate rages regarding the medical benefits and risks of marijuana, but the following point remains: there are places in the United States of America where pot is both illegal and legal at the same time.

The ridiculous ambiguity is just the tip of the iceberg. And it begs the question, "How can we eliminate this hypocrisy and contradiction?"

The answer lies in legalizing marijuana at the federal level.

A statement like that conjures up some frightening images. Imagine people rolling joints during class, lighting up on the commute to work or blowing smoke in children's faces at Lake Reba.

Imagine a 14-year-old walking into Wal-Mart with $20 and walking out with a pack of new, over-the-counter marijuana cigarettes.

Those images are upsetting because they should be, but there's absolutely no reason to believe any of that would happen.

Legalization doesn't imply carelessness, and regulating legal substances is infinitely easier than regulating illegal substances.

It's understandable to oppose the legalization of any drug, but we're much too late for that. There are a number of perfectly legal drugs that surround us each and every day, many of which are arguably more harmful and dangerous than marijuana.

Alcohol is an obvious example, but so is the nicotine in tobacco cigarettes or the caffeine in sodas and coffee. Those three substances are drugs in every sense of the definition. They each alter our mental and physical states and are potentially habit-forming, yet are legal in American society.

Controlling these substances through laws and regulations is part of what keeps them legal. We can limit sales and usage by age, by location and by amount, and we routinely do.

Marijuana would be no different; the law legalizing it would be the first in a system of laws to regulate it heavily.

One of the most dangerous aspects of marijuana now is the market for it.

Black markets are inherently dangerous because the typical way to solve disputes is through violence. No one is accountable in such markets, and anyone can get access if they know where to look.

Legalizing marijuana immediately eliminates the existing black market operated by gangs and drug dealers, instead turning those profits over to companies and corporations. The opportunity for profit would be more than enough to draw interest, and the free market would dictate things from there.

Time, effort and money spent by the government pursuing petty dealers could be better spent elsewhere, as well.

Perhaps the strongest argument in support of legalization is that it opens the product to taxation, generating more income for government programs. High taxes would yield high returns for federal and state programs, granting additional income without causing uproar from the general populace.

Furthermore, more money could be freed-up with reform in the legal system.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that 12.7 percent of all state inmates and 12.4 percent of federal inmates jailed for drug offenses are jailed for marijuana offenses and only marijuana offenses.

Overcrowding in prisons is a serious problem - one that can be alleviated in part by releasing those incarcerated simply for smoking or possessing marijuana.

Regardless of one's personal feelings about marijuana, the costs of a federal ban are enormous (maybe even unsustainable), and fighting the idea of legalization is fighting against the idea of freedom.

In a free country, freedom should extend to individuals so long as it does not negatively impact others. It's precisely why we're allowed to consume alcohol - until we get behind the wheel of a car or create disturbances.

That's where our freedoms stop, and rightly so.

But why then, does that freedom stop with a different substance that also affects only the individual in question?

Why is mere consumption enough with marijuana when it isn't with alcohol?

The answers are unclear, but the debate needs to be taken more seriously.

Those fighting for legalization aren't just a bunch of potheads looking to secure a legal stash: They're citizens fighting for regulation, better control, safer streets and stronger freedoms for all.