Reuters Says Cannabis is a Narcotic

This news report is par for the course when it comes to illicit drugs. Don't ask critical questions. Don't interview cooler heads, a.k.a. drug-reform experts. Don't rock the boat.

The latest twist is, however, that Reuters now calls cannabis a narcotic.

It's like calling a bottle rocket a hand grenade.

Comments

[Dan]

Like police "narcotics units" and much of the general public, newspapers tend to use "narcotic" as a synonym for "illegal drug." There's a nice example of this conflation in the AP Stylebook's "drugs" entry:

"Because the word drugs has come to be used as a synonym for narcotics in recent years, medicine is frequently the better word to specify that an individual is taking medication."

It's unfortunate that copy editors, usually so fond of words that make useful distinctions, haven't fought harder against the semantic broadening here.

[Hunter]

Oh great, we've got some "expert" information on the subject, from the article:

"Those of us who work in the criminal and mental health spheres of the legal industry are acutely aware of the danger cannabis poses and the long-term damage it causes," the lawyer, who has 35 years' experience, said in a statement.

"Reclassification is the only way to address this problem and make concrete progress on tackling cannabis use."

--

Reclassification is the /only/ way to address? Give me a break. That alone mitigates any respect that I might have given him for his 35 years experience (as a lawyer).

Beyond that, the reason he thinks that he is acutely aware of the damage it causes is because he's only ever involved in the terrible and most egregious cases. He's a lawyer with a specialization in mental health, which means the instances of marijuana use that he sees are the ones where the individual in question has already gotten involved with the legal system.

I'm betting that he doesn't ever really get out to see any of the majority of marijuana users that never have an addiction, habituation, or dependence problem, or any of the people who never have a marijuana-related run in with the law. The sheer quantity of those users who never have problems with marijuana completely dwarfs the number who end up in jail for possession, cultivation, or distribution. And thus is the fallacy of the experience that law enforcement, judges and lawyers have with marijuana.

[Jerry]

"And thus is the fallacy of the experience that law enforcement, judges and lawyers have with marijuana."

And you can add the majority of the public who think this way. I had never even heard of "skunk" until all this came around.

[John A]

Tea and coffee have "narcotic" ingredients.

I only tried marijuana once, circa 1974, and found the aftereffect disturbing enough to never try again. Or maybe it was the fifth of tequila I consumed the same evening? whatever.