Courts should be for legal rulings, not personal opinions

How many times have I read in the paper that when sentencing somebody for possession of cannabis that the judge is doing this for the defendant's own good? In reality, people have been using cannabis for thousands of years with no real harm to themselves or others around them. In fact, cannabis has been used to treat numerous illnesses and diseases, and even today cannabis can be prescribed to patients thus making the drug beneficial to not only their own their health but in turn to the lives of others around them.

So many times we hear that cannabis is an evil to society that causes crime and other troubles. The fact is, up until recently, with cannabis being illegal, there have been no real studies to show how cannabis actually affects society. It seems that judges are just spouting the same old rhetoric, which they themselves have been told.

Here in the real world, cannabis has been legal not only for medicinal but also recreational use in Colorado for six months now and there has been no evidence of this evil on society emerging. The truth is that crime rates have in fact slightly fallen. Possibly due to the fact that people are choosing cannabis over alcohol, which in turn could lead to significantly fewer violent attacks on others. It is also possible that, without prohibition pushing up the price of cannabis, users are no longer having to commit crimes to afford their preferred intoxicant. Of course, nobody is being arrested for possession of cannabis any more, which frees up officers to concentrate on catching real criminals, but if cannabis truly is evil, then how come crime rates are down compared to the same six months of previous years when the drug was illegal? I would say it is not a wonder then, when most people know the truth about cannabis that they no longer believe what is told to them by such people as judges who are meant to know what is going on with the law. This is a slippery slope itself because if the judges are wrong about cannabis then maybe a youngster who might not know any better may feel that a judge could be wrong about harder drugs such as heroin, too. Hmm.

Now my point here today is not even about the legalisation of cannabis, even though to anybody with half a brain, the answer should be blatantly obvious. On 7 July, I was reading the newspaper and came across a case where a young girl was given a criminal record for the possession and supply of the Class B substance JWH-018, which most will know better as Spice, Top Draw or many other synthetic cannabis smoking blends. Upon sentencing the girl to prison, Judge Russell Finch said, and I will quote: 'This was a pernicious crime that needed to be suppressed'. So he was saying that the substance JWH-018 has a harmful effect on society and once again showed no evidence to back up his personal opinion.

Now we all know that up until a few years ago, Spice and other synthetic cannabis smoking blends were not illegal to buy, consume or possess. During this time, when the drug was freely available, I do not remember any reports of an increase in crime or any other harmful effects to society directly related to the drug. In fact, the only time there was any real problem with JWH-018 is when the chemical was banned and then users had to experience withdrawals and also any users found in possession of the chemical were dragged to court and had criminal records inflicted upon them like in the case of this young girl in question who was sentenced to prison which in reality causes far more harm to her life than at any point when she might have been smoking or selling the drug to others. How is this fair and how in any way can it be justified just because somebody says it is wrong without producing any proof of how it is wrong? I was always led to believe that court was all about proof and evidence had to be shown otherwise the crime in question had to be dismissed?

Now my point is not about freeing this young girl, I do not even know her and she clearly broke the law regardless of it being right or wrong – the law is the law, so they say. No, in fact I am really just thinking out loud and wondering that if a judge exists to be in court for no other reason than to hand out sentences on crimes, then why are they also handing out their personal opinions on matters too? People can easily make mistakes and they do so all the time.

If I were a judge and was looking at the situation in Colorado and other areas which are legalising cannabis, I would be feeling rather foolish right now about some of the uninformed remarks I had made over the years.

I might even be wondering if one day I might have to admit I was wrong and actually make some apologies, especially to those who had been using the drug and claiming they were doing so for medicinal reasons.

Name and address withheld.