'Heads vs. Feds' debates legalization of marijuana
By Samantha Pirc, Campus Life writer
February 8, 2008 | 11 a.m.
Steve Hager, the former editor-in-chief of High Times magazine, and Bob Stutman, a 25-year veteran of the Drug Enforcement Agency, came to Ohio University as part of the Hot Topic Debate series being hosted by Baker University Center.
The “Heads vs. Feds” debate has taken place at college campuses across the country presenting Stutman's and Hager's clashing views on marijuana legalization and fielding questions from students.
Tickets to the event were available free to students with an OU ID, and all 1,000 available tickets were claimed long before the doors opened at Baker. A line of students who were unable to get tickets but still hoping to get into the event formed at the entrance to the ballroom.
A video by Wolfman Productions, the agency that Baker worked with to bring in the debaters, introduced Hager and Stutman and gave all their biographical information. Each spent 15 minutes presenting his side of the argument before opening up the floor to students' questions.
Hager gave five reasons why he believes marijuana should be legalized: medicinal use, the usefulness of hemp fiber, the overcrowding of prisons with drug offenders, the funding of corruption caused by the war on drugs and the religious function of cannabis for certain people.
“[There are] more diseases and disorders for which this is a useful treatment than any other substance in the world,” Hager said. “I know people who can walk, who are alive because they used marijuana as a medicine.”
Hager spoke adamantly about how the youth of America is already addicted to prescription medicines that are “handed out like candy” at student health centers, and he said that one of the reasons marijuana is not legal is because pharmaceutical companies have a problem with this “free medicine.”
“I think doing 10 years in an American prison system is worse for you than smoking a joint,” Hager said of the overcrowding of prisons in America with drug offenders.
Hager’s most important argument, and the one he claims is hardest for him to talk about, centers on a person’s right to smoke cannabis as part of his or her religious ceremonies.
“We’re as American as apple pie and baseball,” said Hager of the counterculture of which he is a part. “We are honest, sincere people, and to us, marijuana is a sacrament.”
Stutman countered Hager’s argument by saying that you cannot make an important decision, such as legalizing a drug, based on emotionally charged personal opinions, which is what he claims Hager's entire argument is, and not facts.
Stutman said that while Hager makes an eloquent argument for legalization, the main reason most people want to be able to smoke pot is because it is their recreational drug of choice. He retorted against boos made by audience members when talking about ways to use the chemicals found in cannabis without getting high, saying that the reaction is exactly what kills the argument for legalization that Hager had just made.
“Just because God made it doesn’t make it good,” Stutman said of cannabis as a medicine. He stated that there are really only two good chemicals that can be used medicinally and that 433 others are useless.
While he admittedly has very different views from Hager, Stutman said he does not believe that people should be put in prison for smoking pot. Instead, Stutman believes there should be a penalty system in place where people would receive fines, much like the way people now receive speeding tickets.
Stutman also said that, in reality, the majority of Americans do not support legalization, citing the fact that it was on the ballot in nine states and failed in all nine. This lack of support is one of the factors in Stutman’s argument, but he did say that he would follow the lead of American voters if the time came.
“The day the majority of Americans vote to legalize cannabis, I would, too,” Stutman said.
During the question-and-answer period of the debate, Stutman was hit with the most questions from students, though Hager was given a chance to respond as well.
At times the two almost seemed to come to an agreement on certain issues, such as the need and importance of activism and the dangers of smoking.
“I told my own kids to never smoke anything,” Hager said. He urged students who wish to experience the high from marijuana to vaporize it, drink it in tea or eat it in brownies.
Both men also commented on the dangers of smoking and then operating a motor vehicle. Stutman quoted a statement made by legalization advocacy group NORML, which concludes driving while high is extremely dangerous.
Students who attended the event had the chance to stay after the debate and personally speak with either of the men, and a large number choose to do so.
Hager spoke with a few students interested in starting a chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a student-led movement that gets students involved in the political process of changing drug laws.
“I think it’s important the argument be logically held,” Stutman said about why he chooses to present his side, knowing he will face so much adversity at college campuses across the country.
Chad Barnhardt, assistant director at Baker, said the debate seemed like a great success and that they would learn from this debate how to facilitate the others that are planned for the series.
“This is what we do, we facilitate these conversations,” Barnhardt said. “These topics are not debated often. They complement what is learned in the classroom.”
---