Student Scholarship
Document Type
Research Paper
Abstract
The sociological effects of marijuana legislation are explored through a cyclical relationship between informal social control and formal law. The document defines three distinct foci: the informal code of morals and mores, a transitional period of social instability, and the eventual implementation of formal code. Morals are described as individual concerns or expressions of the superego, while mores are culturally salient norms that protect societal stability. The transition to formal legislation occurs when personal morals conflict too drastically with societal mores, causing a perceived threat to social order.
The text argues that much of the push for restrictive marijuana legislation has been fueled by inaccurate information from mass media and law enforcement officials acting as moral entrepreneurs. Scientific studies on substances like LSD were often misrepresented to create public alarm, and even standard dictionaries incorrectly labeled marijuana as a dangerous habit-forming drug. This misinformation reinforces the Protestant Ethic, which condemns activities pursued for pure ecstasy or pleasure without a utilitarian outcome. Consequently, society justifies restrictive laws as a means to prevent individuals from becoming wards of the state due to self-destructive behavior.
The primary consequence of these laws is the criminalization of the middle class and youth. A criminal record for marijuana possession can permanently eliminate professional opportunities, restrict access to higher education, and force individuals into associations with hardened criminals. The document concludes that when formal laws conflict with personal morals to the point of being intolerable, society enters a new transitional period to push for change, continuing the circle of societal control.
Research Highlights
The Problem: Judicial and legislative systems face a conflict between informal social controls (morals and mores) and formal drug legislation, specifically regarding whether marijuana use is inherently detrimental to the stability of society.
The Method: The researcher analyzes the transition from informal codes to formal law through a sociological lens, examining mass media influence, the "Protestant Ethic" philosophy, and specific legal precedents like Leary v. United States.
Quantitative Finding: Hashish contains approximately five to six times the potency of marijuana; marijuana legislation has been heavily influenced by laws remaining on the books for the past 100 years; federal penalties for marijuana were significantly increased by legislation enacted in 1951 and 1956.
Qualitative Finding: Marijuana is identified as a non-habit-forming hallucinogen that does not produce physical tolerance or withdrawal; formal criminalization creates a "second-class citizen" status for the middle class by restricting professional licensing, higher education access, and employment; inaccurate media reporting and "moral entrepreneurs" drive a push for formal legislation despite a lack of scientific evidence regarding the drug's danger.
Finding: Societal control functions as a continuous circle where informal moral codes influence the creation of formal laws, which in turn stimulate and reshape the informal moral code.
Publication Date
5-1972
Recommended Citation
Friedman, Judith L., "The Sociological Effects of Marijuana Legislation" (1972). Student Scholarship. 175.
https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/student-research-papers/175
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Faculty Sponsor
Archive