add 4-5 (closer to 5 please) more pages to the attached essay. no plagiarism. please try to use the the the information from the work cited page and avoid adding more than 2 more sources.
You must view the PBS three-part film on Prohibition:
www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition. Compare and contrast
what happened socially, politically, and legally during this period of history with the current
legalization of marijuana movement in the United States. What issues are the same/which are
different? What was the criminal justice system’s response during Prohibition compare to
current responses? Ensure that you use as much of your text in your paper discussion as possible
(including theory, criminal justice information and data). APA format is required. .
Slide 1 of 1
UNFORMATTED ATTACHMENT PREVIEW
Running Head: WHAT ARE THE ISSUES What are the issues? Name of the student: Name of professor: Name of course: Submission date: 1 WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 2 In the past, marijuana was known to have no any significant effect in social life. Politically, the FBN back in the 1930s rejected any sort of proposal that marijuana should not be legal an aspect that triggered the formation of a lobby group at the beginning of 1994. The group adopted the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act and considered marijuana to be illegal. On this regard, the FBN responded by hurling a moral campaign against the drug. In addition, the media and the policy makers joined the movement and ruled out that marijuana had the following effects on the social life: it caused violence, increased rate of criminal activities and was not only viewed as a dangerous drug but also a menace. Furthermore, Most of the analysis published in the popular magazines in the 1930s argued that: marijuana could not be used in a controllable way, violence was the primary effect of using marijuana and marijuana was one of the dangerous drugs in the United States (Himmelstein, 1983). Since the 1930s, criminal violence was viewed as the central point of the effects of marijuana which implied the destruction of will and perception. The use of marijuana provoked a serious attention from the media as they summed the overall effects of marijuana to violent crimes. However, until the marijuana tax was approved by the federal government, the launched campaign by the media against the legalization of marijuana was considered to be biased. Later in the 1960s, the possession and the sale of marijuana was criminalized at the federal level. By contrast, the current legalization of the marijuana movement in the US, marijuana is argued to be a recreational drug. The legalization of marijuana in the United States has triggered a serious debate among the politicians and the citizens. Recently, about 30 states have voted the legalization of marijuana despite its state at the federal level (Kamin, 2017). However, some of the states and other politicians have failed to vote for its legalization WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 3 because of the social problems that emanate from the use of marijuana such as criminal violence. According to the National academies of science, engineering and medicine report (Circella et al, 2017), marijuana contributes to both short and long-term negative effects on health and social life. Therefore, the majority of the marijuana opponents in the US, use this report as an evidence of why the sale and the possession of marijuana should be prohibited. Most notably, from both the period of history and the current legalization of marijuana movement, it can be pointed out that what happened socially is that many violent criminal activities that emanate from the use marijuana have been reported. Politically, the argument about the legalization of marijuana has attracted interest from the media, citizens and the politicians. However, in the period of history several legal movements such as the policymakers groups and the FBN movement launched a campaign against marijuana while in the current period, the legalization of marijuana has been done through voting. Finally, for both periods the sale and the possession of marijuana remains illegal at the federal level. Fundamentally, there are several issues that are depicted to be the same from both periods. First, in both periods marijuana is considered to be the major cause of violent crimes in the society. In both periods it is believed that the users of marijuana or the marijuana addicts are committed to doing all sorts of dangerous crimes and, they end up being temporarily insane in the long run. Moreover, in both periods the involvement of media in the campaign against the use of marijuana is viewed to be a biased opinion. In this case, as it is stated in the ruling elite theory, the media only serve the interests of the ruling elites and the affiliates. It is from this point of view that the perception of media biases is evident in both periods. Finally, despite the fact that about 30 states in the United WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 4 States have currently legalized the use of marijuana, for both periods the sale and the possession of marijuana remain to be criminalized at the federal level. The issue that is viewed to be different is that in the period of history there were several lobby groups like the FBN group in the 1930s formed to campaign against the legalization of marijuana which was later joined by the media group and individuals in 1960s. Contrary, the current campaign for the legalization of marijuana in the United States is done by individuals who are natural politicians in their respective states. The criminal justice system’s response during Prohibition of marijuana in the period of history was triggered by the pressure from the media and the policymakers. Though the media was considered to be biased, not all news from the media is considered to be factually false because the media operates from a mixture of different processes highlighted from the four theories of media bias (Goode, 1989). Nevertheless, both the possession and the sale of marijuana in the period of history was criminalized and ruled out as prohibited. By contrast, in the current response, the criminal justice system criminalized the sale and the possession of marijuana at the federal level but legalized it for medical and recreational purposes. The issue of legalizing or delegalizing marijuana in the US still remains to be in a stale in the current period, because of the opposing pressure from politicians of different states (Rosenberg, 2018). The media has played as pivotal in the shaping of the public roles as well as the laws that govern the possession, the distribution of marijuana. The relationship on the media exposure compared to the attitude on the marijuana legalization from 1975 to 2012, 1975-1990 as well as the 1991-2012 (Caulkins, Kilmer & Kleiman, 2012). The findings point to the fact that how much exposer attributed to media was not considered significant in 1975 -1990, newspapers as well as the television was found to have a considerable impact favoring the WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 5 legalization of the marijuana as at the year 1991 -2012 (Nielsen & Bonn, 2008). Central to the year the 1930s, the media coverage on the marijuana was based on the horror stories leading to its illegalization. The attitude of the Americans towards the marijuana has significantly changed over time since its criminalization in the 1930s in comparison to today. This is exemplified from a mixture of different processes highlighted from the four theories of media bias (Goode, 1989). Notably, the public opinion that acts in favor of the legalization of marijuana has risen significantly since 1990. It is plausible to note that the opinion of the public of the marijuana showed a great diversion in the 1990s, whereas today the opinion of the public has significantly changed in favor of the legalization (Gerber, 2004). Moreover, the concentration of the marijuana was in a few selected cities coupled with the fact that the consent of the general public was on the other drug that was considered to be dangerous. However, there was a change in the rhetoric as well as the sentiment attached to the marijuana(Nielsen & Bonn, 2008). With little knowledge on the medical as well as the medical knowledge on the marijuana the drug use was connected to the violent crimes (Jones, 2015). The public opinion on marijuana in recent years has greatly differed in the 1990s during which the year it was outlawed. Currently, the media coverage encompasses these of the medicinal purpose, the level of legalization in any the state, the cost of enforcing as well as the benefit compounded with the harms associated with the use of the marijuana (Caulkins et al., 2008). In addition, from the political context, the media content in regards to the views of the president has also changed significantly (Gerber, 2004). In the 1990s, the media coverage on the presidential view was based on how the presidents particularly Bill Clinton tried to inhale the drug. This reflects changes in the media coverage from the first president (Nielsen & Bonn, 2008)… For instance, presidents such as Carter and Ford was in favor of the legalization of the drug in the 1970s while Reagan and George Bush were characterized with WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 6 their hatred for the drug, contrarily, President Obama never gave the use of drug much importance it deserves (Gerber, 2004). Socially, the legalization of the marijuana was based on the sociodemographic predictors which have changed over time from 1990 through 2015. In the 1990s, the birth cohort was shown to have attitudes that were pro-legalization (Nielsen & Bonn, 2008). This is premised on the fact that the earlier cohorts had little knowledge on the drug thus were less exposed. This meant that they stood had fewer chances of favoring compared to the current cohort who have knowledge of the drug and the situation thus are likely to be lured into the biasness of the media. The advancement in the technology has provided an outlet through which the knowledge of the drug is shared. In addition, changes in the education overtimes have contributed to the legalization of marijuana. Thus, education is a considerable predictor in the attitudes towards the legalization o0f marijuana. This implies, currently people are more educated thus have a greater knowledge of the realities associated with the use of marijuana. However, the changes witnessed in the odds in favour of marijuana legalization overtime points to the fact that individual having low level in educating are equally coming to terms with the realities of the situation this implied that most people in the united states were not having direct knowledge on the use of the drug (Gerber, 2004). Accordingly, the information was gotten from the common which was the mass media. In most instance, the media was known for displaying the worst cases with a biased spin on the event as well as making expectation for purpose of selling news. In this time, the media was responsible for influencing the opinion of the public as well as manipulating the definition of a particular issue. Similarly, the use of marijuana currently as a recreational drug has been lately stigmatized. WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 7 The legalization of the marijuana in the 1970s was pushed by activism from the grassroots which was responsible for discrimination through criminalization to legalization (Caulkins et al., 2008). Some of the activism was pushed by the veterans of the civil movement as well as the anti-war young men. They argued that legislation of the marijuana is not harmful as purported by the state. Currently, the support for the legalization the marijuana is mainly youth wires those opposing the legalization are those of the age 65 years (Gerber, 2004). The structure in the public opinion with regards to the legalization of marijuana has remained distinctive based on today’s political context. One of the most divisive issue contemporaries is the support for legalization of the marijuana which cuts across the party line in an unusual way. Notably, there was a change in the cultural attitude in the 1960s as well as the 1970 counterculture (Gerber, 2004). This was followed by a backlash against its legalization in the 1980s. This was responsible for influencing the party. Socially, gender played an integral role in the legalization of marijuana. However, this role was never expected. This implies that the omen that was on the right of the men were likely to oppose the legalization. Notably, the fact the women were likely to have babies. This implied that they were likely to have a conservative stance on the legalization of marijuana (Nielsen & Bonn, 2008). Most studies suggest that parenthood may not be a strong factor to consider with regards to an individual position on the legalization of marijuana. However, parents that are married stand higher chances of opposing the legalization compared to parents that are not married. This points to the fact that marriage coupled with parenting had a negative correlation as well as a predictor of the attitude towards the legislation of the legislation of the marijuana despite variance in the relationships and results in overtime (Caulkins et al., 2008). WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 8 References Caulkins, J. P., Hawken, A., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. (2012b). Marijuana legalization: What everyone needs to know. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Circella, G., Alemi, F., Tiedeman, K., Berliner, R. M., Lee, Y., Fulton, L., … & Handy, S. (2017). What Affects Millennials’ Mobility? PART II: The Impact of Residential Location, Individual Preferences and Lifestyles on Young Adults’ Travel Behavior in California (No. NCST-201703). Gerber, R. (2004). Legalizing marijuana: Drug policy reform and prohibition politics. Westport, CT: Praeger. Goode, E. (1989). Drugs in American society. New York: Knopf. Himmelstein, J. L. (1983). From killer weed to drop-out drug: the changing ideology of marihuana. Contemporary Crises, 7(1), 13-38. Jones, J. (2015). In the U.S., 58% back legal marijuana use (Gallup poll conducted October 7-11, 2015).Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/186260/back-legal- marijuana.aspx Kamin, S. (2017). Marijuana Regulation in the United States. In Dual Markets (pp. 105-119). Springer, Cham. Nielsen, A. L., & Bonn, S. (2008). Media exposure and attitudes toward drug addiction spending, 1975-2004. Deviant Behavior, 29, 726-752. Rosenberg, E. (2018). Interpretation of California’s Marijuana Regulations after Proposition 64 and Pharmacy Practice Roles in Medical Marijuana Dispensing against Federal Enforcement Risks. WHAT ARE THE ISSUES 9