Citizens, mostly older but including one 16-year-old, stated that marijuana causes brain damage, leads to addiction, and is a federally controlled substance. Many comments, as one young man said later, sounded straight out of the old film, Reefer Madness.
However, one woman criticized lumping cannabis and booze together, saying marijuana is a wonderful medicine, a natural herb that helps many. Few would say that of whiskey.
I was glad one councilor mentioned the history of the cannabis prohibition. She correctly noted that prohibiting marijuana had a lot to do with controlling ethnic minorities. (Similarly, while the national alcohol prohibition was advocated by many well-meaning progressives, their southern allies wanted it mostly to control Blacks; and many “progressives” saw the problem in terms of workers – suddenly including many eastern Europeans -- drinking all the milk money, then beating their wives.)
I lived part of that history. In youth, I drank and smoked, sometimes to excess. Only one of the current city councilors was even alive when I first enjoyed marijuana. I often did so in integrated company, which was still somewhat frowned on in this country. We knew well that local police, incensed by our advocacy of integration and peace, hoped to use minor drug charges to silence us.
Science seems to have borne out my belief that alcohol did more damage than grass. Brain damage? I have many friends who’ve consumed grass for half a century. They’re doing just fine for their ages. On the other hand, cannabis seems both purer and more powerful than during my youth.
One young man favoring the change said, “Marijuana is always good medicine, doesn’t matter whether I use it medically or just with my friends after this meeting.” Maybe, kid; but my friends who thought that way about psychedelics died young. While, marijuana is relatively benign, any substance that messes with our minds and emotions should be treated with respect.
So I saw this issue from a more pragmatic standpoint. Since moving into town, I’ve had a few nights when insanely loud music from a nearby bar made me wish I could go to some city official’s quiet neighborhood and blast my car radio to the max. At 2 am. People going somewhere to get high and have fun will play music or otherwise make noise, or behave less carefully than usual.
So I was glad they voted 4-3 to keep the buffers. (Yes, it’s unfair that multifamily residences in mixed zoning areas don’t get buffers. So remedy that.)
But my main takeaway was enhanced respect for the councilors. They started at 1 pm. They listened to scores of passionate people shouting ‘Yea!’ or ‘Nay’ at them, and even saying they cared nothing about kids. Some spoke then left immediately. Most of us split after the lengthy cannabis discussion. At 6:30 pm I was watching on video. After six hours of hearing sometimes complex issues people cared about, councilors were still making decisions. At 7:04 a city official started a lengthy lecture on changes in his department. They listened patiently, and asked sensible questions.
At 8:30, after declining to offer “councilor comments,” they wearily voted to adjourn. Councilor Flores got in a great last line: “No! I want to stay longer.”
Yeah, they should implement citizens’ police oversight soon; but they deserve our gratitude.
– 30 --
[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 11 June, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and on the newspaper’s website, as well as on the KRWG website. A related radio commentary will air during the week both on KTAL-LP (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and on KRWG Radio. ]
No comments:
Post a Comment