The legalization of the recreational use of marijuana is upon us—and with it, endless controversy over how to best deal with it. Businesses, apartment complexes, and especially universities are all developing their policies towards the nearly-legal substance. But, perhaps the most important decision to be made about cannabis is its use on university campuses.
At Carleton, the university’s policy will affect 3,600 students living in residence, who will spend the majority of their time living under the school’s regulations. The university should allow the use of legal marijuana in certain areas on campus, to avoid the hypocritical stance they are currently taking.
Carleton recently released its policy guidelines for the use of recreational marijuana. The policy bans the consumption of marijuana on campus. This is not a logical step for the university to take. The university argues that marijuana use won’t be allowed on campus because of guidelines stated in the Ontario Cannabis Act, which will regulate marijuana use in Ontario come November. The Act states that people cannot use recreational marijuana in a public space or workplace. In the policy, Carleton claims that since the university is both a public space and a workplace, they will not allow the use of marijuana.
This argument would have been fine, if not for the fact that Carleton allows alcohol to be both consumed and sold on campus. The Alcohol and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act bans public drinking and intoxication—and Carleton’s residences are no strangers to public intoxication.
This letter is not arguing that Carleton should ban alcohol on campus. But, if Carleton claims they are a public space, that creates an issue with how they treat campus alcohol consumption. The fact that the university campus is private property is made clear to incoming Carleton students—meaning that as long as a student is 19 or older, they could legally drink in university residences and bars, with the exception of alcohol-free residence floors. However, the university’s claim that they are a public space, and therefore unsuitable for marijuana, makes the allowance of alcohol an issue. If the university wants to ban marijuana use on the grounds of being a public space, logically it should have to change its policy towards alcohol use on campus as well.
The same inconsistency in logic can be found in Carleton’s insistence that marijuana be banned on campus because Carleton is a workplace. If Carleton is concerned about smoking marijuana on campus, they might be shocked to find out that people are already smoking a different plant on campus—in designated areas the university set up for those smokers. The Smoke-Free Ontario Act bans smoking in enclosed workplaces. It makes no sense that Carleton isn’t allowing marijuana use in designated cigarette smoking areas outside of campus buildings (enclosed workplaces). Allowing marijuana use in smoking areas would clearly not violate any smoking laws, because cigarette smoking is taking place there.
Banning marijuana under the pretense of being a public place and a workplace makes no sense when the university is clearly allowing other drugs on campus. The policy feels short-sighted and rooted in the belief that marijuana is a worse drug than tobacco and alcohol. While marijuana is by no means a healthy substance, compared to the drugs Carleton does allow on campus, it is not the worst thing you can put into your body—do a quick news search on the recent studies surrounding healthy alcohol consumption. It makes little sense to ban marijuana consumption on campus. Aside from the logical breaks in Carleton’s argument, the policy will only drive students off campus to get high—which will direct them to greater risks of harm than what they’ll encounter on university property.
