Skip to main content

The Economist Calls Medical Marijuana Patients “Stoners”

Submitted by smorgan on
Why can’t The Economist acknowledge the political progress of marijuana policy reform without resorting to derogatory stereotypes?

Meanwhile stoners continued their slow, shuffling march to social acceptance. Massachusetts voters decided to downgrade possession of less than an ounce of cannabis to an infraction, punishable by a mere $100 fine. Michigan legalised medicinal marijuana.

Grow up. This isn’t a joke, not anymore. In Massachusetts, voters overwhelming supported reforming harsh marijuana laws that ruin lives. It’s not about getting stoned. It’s about getting an education and getting a job.

In Michigan, voters overwhelmingly agreed that it’s wrong to arrest seriously ill patients for using medical marijuana on the advice of their doctors. What the hell does that have to do with being a "stoner"? Seriously, I’d like to know. This isn’t journalism, it’s childish name-calling.

If anyone remains confused about what marijuana policy reform really is, this ought to answer your questions:

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.