Exploring the Dimensions of Support for Decriminalizing Drugs

Abstract

This study uses surveys of citizens and criminal justice employees to illustrate the multidimensional nature of views about decriminalization. Both groups supported strict legal penalties for marijuana offenses and believed that if legal restrictions were eased other types of crime would increase. Ironically, they also expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the law. They believed that even if they had all the resources necessary the police could not stop marijuana use. At the same time they were willing to pay higher taxes for more drug enforcement. This study highlights the problem with treating either decriminalization or criminalization as simple ideas and notes the implications of this for developing public policy.

The Effects of Victim’s Substance Use and Relationship Closeness on Mock Jurors’ Judgments in an Acquaintance Rape Case

“…As noted earlier, alcohol is viewed as a relatively "safe" drug that is associated with different attitudes and expectancies than other drugs are (Stylianou, 2002;Weisheit & Johnson, 1992). In the present study, we examined whether the relationship between substance use and relationship closeness is the same for LSD, a drug that is less socially acceptable than alcohol but still somewhat widely used.…”

“…For example, one largescale questionnaire study showed that over 55% of the respondents perceived the physical harm from alcohol and marijuana use to be comparable (Weisheit & Johnson, 1992), but this relatively receptive and accepting response differed distinctly from the responses given to drugs such as heroin, LSD, and cocaine. Over 84% of the survey respondents rated use of these substances as being more harmful than use of alcohol (Weisheit & Johnson, 1992). Another survey showed that, although most participants classified occasional use of LSD to be a serious crime, they merely "discouraged" the daily use of marijuana and alcohol (Stylianou, 2002).…”

“…In light of the differential attitudes toward alcohol and other types of substances (Weisheit & Johnson, 1992), as well as the widespread use of these other substances (e.g., 5-10% of high school seniors admit to having used LSD at least once; Doweiko, 1996), it seems worthwhile to explore how sexual assault victims intoxicated by other means would be perceived. If "blaming the victim" occurs for a victim who has consumed a relatively unstigmatized substance such as alcohol, then intoxication from consumption of less socially acceptable substances should elicit even more negative perceptions of the victim.…”

“…Conditions varied in substance and legality among (a) sober/control condition, (b) legal alcohol intoxication, (c) illegal (underage) alcohol intoxication, and (d) LSD intoxication. LSD was chosen because it is perceived as a much more dangerous, and less acceptable, substance than alcohol (as opposed to, say, marijuana, the perception of which does not differ consistently from alcohol Stylianou, 2002;Weisheit & Johnson, 1992). Both the legal and illegal alcohol conditions were included in an attempt to determine the extent to which any negative perceptions of the victim were due to her use of an intoxicating substance (true in all but the sober condition), as opposed to her use of a substance that was intoxicating as well as illegal (true in the illegal alcohol and LSD conditions).…”

“…First, based on previous research (Hammock & Richardson, 1997;Schuller & Wall, 1998), we hypothesized that mock jurors would perceive victims who were sober as most credible, followed by victims who were intoxicated as a result of legal alcohol, then victims intoxicated due to illegal alcohol use; we predicted further that victims who were intoxicated as a result of LSD use would be viewed as least credible, given the low opinion that most people have of LSD (Stylianou, 2002;Weisheit & Johnson, 1992). Second, we hypothesized that relationship closeness would interact with the victim's level of intoxication.…”