Under current NZ law, the penalty for cultivating and dealing cannabis is harsher than the penalty for merely possessing it. (If you're caught with more than 28 grams the presumption is that you are supplying rather than just using it.)
Question: Following a utilitarian theory of punishment, is the state justified in imposing harsher penalties for cultivation and supply than for possession?

Question

Under current NZ law, the penalty for cultivating and dealing cannabis is harsher than the penalty for merely possessing it. (If you're caught with more than 28 grams the presumption is that you are supplying rather than just using it.)

Question: Following a utilitarian theory of punishment, is the state justified in imposing harsher penalties for cultivation and supply than for possession?

Answer

No.  The penalties should be equally harsh, because that will really deter people from using cannabis.  And if there are fewer users, the suppliers will go out of business.

Answer

No. Cannabis is a gateway drug, so people who use cannabis will soon move on to other drugs, like alcohol and meth. The cannabis manufacturer will just keep on supplying cannabis, because that's their expertise.

Answer

Yes, if the state is successful in discouraging people from cultivating and dealing cannabis, then it should also result in fewer people using cannabis.  (Obviously.)

Answer

Yes, by cultivating and dealing cannabis the offender harms other people, so they deserve to be punished.  But the cannabis user doesn't harm anyone, except perhaps themselves. So they shouldn't be punished at all, really.

Crowdly

Under current NZ law, the penalty for cultivating and dealing cannabis is harshe...

Хочете миттєвий доступ до всіх перевірених відповідей на elearn.waikato.ac.nz?