Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

Soft substances and adult services should be decriminalized.

Firstly, let's consider the examples I've provided regarding fast food chains, which are not irrelevant. They are pertinent illustrations because they involve products known to cause harm, even death, when consumed excessively or improperly, yet people continue to indulge in them. For instance, individuals who overeat or drive recklessly are not typically referred to as victims. If substance users who overdose are considered victims, then why aren't people suffering from heart disease due to poor diet, cancer from smoking, or liver ailments from excessive drinking also classified as victims?

Counterpoint: "In 1999, data from medical examiners show that out of 664 incidents related to soft substances, there were 187 fatalities where soft substances were the sole factor." However, upon closer inspection of the full report, it reveals that "… in total deaths involving only soft substances, 35 were suicides, 53 were accidental/unexpected (not overdose), and 69 fell into the 'all other' category." The report clarifies that the term "death" encompasses not only direct but also contributing causes. Therefore, soft substances have never been the sole cause of death.

Further studies indicate that "Animal tests have shown that extremely high doses of cannabinoids are needed to have a lethal effect, leading scientists to conclude that the ratio of the amount of cannabinoids necessary to intoxicate relative to the amount necessary to cause death is 1 to 40,000. In other words, to overdose, one would have to consume 40,000 times as much soft substance as required to get high. In contrast, the ratio for alcohol is between 1 to 4 and 1 to 10. It's evident why around 5000 people die from alcohol overdoses every year, whereas no one dies from soft substance overdoses."

Moreover, "Soft substance use is often mentioned in hospital emergency room visits for drug overdose." It's crucial to note that minors who consume alcohol, even non-lethal amounts, are sent to the emergency room as a precautionary measure. Similarly, individuals found under the influence of soft substances are taken to the emergency room for safety, not because they are in danger of dying. Additionally, emergency room visits are not necessarily a direct result of the actual "use" of the drug.

Critics argue that "soft substance users exhibit increased neurotic and psychopathic behavior." However, such claims are based on studies where animals

Why should it be legalized??!! Then more people will be driving drunk and the death rate will rocket sky high. My guess is that you already do drugs and just don't want to get caught with it

To answer your questions at the top:The war on drugs is far too serious, but I am on the pro side of stopping drugs. It should be illegal, but with lesser jail sentences (like 9 years instead of 10.)"We can pass laws against getting high in public."We've passed laws about not drinking and driving, public drunkenness, and not smoking in many facilities. And look how that turned out. It's time for an OVERLOAD OF REASONS!!!•Also, many people are trying to make tobacco illegal. In California, there are commercials and webpages all over that are trying to stop it. If smoking tobacco is bad, then smoking marijuana is just as bad. Both of them should be illegal due to health concerns. Also, driving while high is as bad as driving while intoxicated.•True, no one has ever died from smoking too much pot, but it made their lives a living hell. And that may be a bit worse than dying, pending your opinion on the afterlife. •As we both know, the world is trying ever so hard to stop cancer. Marijuana has 60% more cancer-causing particles than tobacco [1]. People smoking marijuana can get pregnant, leading to deformed babies whose lives will be very bad. •While marijuana has never killed anybody, 75 people per year are high on pot while they die. We do not know that this is a coincidence or not. [1]Those are all of the reasons I have today for you. It's been fun, and now it's up to the voters to see what they think![1] http://www.drugfreeworld.org...

This is a debate for A341 to finially finish his debate on this topic and I took him up on this. I thank him ahead of time for accepting this challenge. Rules Round 1 is for definitions by Con while Pro will make his opening arguments. Round 2 Con will make contentions and rebuttles, while Pro Refutes. Round 3 is rebuttles by Con and Pro makes rebuttles and Conclusion. Round 4 Con makes rebuttles and conclusion, Pro will states, "No round as argeed upon." If Pro says anything else in the finial round then it's a forfeit of all 7 points. No swearing No trolling. All- every (http://dictionary.reference.com...) Legalized- to make legal (http://dictionary.reference.com...) recreationial (drug)- (of a drug or medication) used for recreation and enjoyment rather than to treat a medical condition: ( http://dictionary.reference.com...) *Note- this debate is about legalizing drugs for recreationial purposes not medicinial.

I believe Cannabis should be legalised. Con can make any argument against this they like.

Hey! How are you doin'? I'm daddydrerek616, And I don't believe that the United States federal government should legalize all drugs. First off, Smoking is for retards. No one wants to have health problems, Right? Well, The disabled honkeys seem to do. Now, Let's take a look at cigarettes. They cause lung cancer. No smart white person would want that, Unless they are disabled. Now, You might argue that they can't stop smoking, But my question is, Why did they start smoking them in the first place? I still don't get that. Why would you want lung cancer as a part of your life? Cigarettes should be banned because of this. Second, Marijuana. Niggers love to smoke it and get high everyday. It's so god damn annoying. It's already illegal in the first place, So why make it legal now? Also, No, We shouldn't have medical marijuana, Because the black people are just going to abuse the system so they can get high like the niggers they are. Third, Meth. Yeah, Screw that. Meth f#cks people up. 'Nuff said. I could go ON AND ON AND ON about how bad drugs are. Basically, Drugs are bad, And only disabled honkeys, Niggers, And other races smoke. Us smart white people are clean, And don't like drugs.

I congratulate my opponent on knowing his own beliefs. It remains to be seen whether he can back them up. I represent the status quo in this debate. Pro argues for a change and he must justify it. He must show that cannabis should (not could or will, but morally ought to) be legalized. I await his opening arguments. First, though, by way of clarification, let me make it clear that I will assume unless corrected that he means "Cannabis (marijuana) should be made legal to possess, grow, sell, use, and transport in the United States. "

Yea it really is a nice debate :) This is my first debate on this website, on any website actually, and I'm taking this as an opportunity to learn from other great debaters such as yourself. I will be countering your points and adding some of mine which will be my counter argument. By saying illegal gambling do you mean like counting cards ? Nevertheless since marijuana is illegal most of its sellers are either small solo distributors or work for a criminal that gains money by selling weed in the streets, funding them with more and more money. According to about.com "the average price of 0.5 grams (a unit) of marijuana sold for $8.60 on the street, while its cost of production is only $1.70." Making the average profit a big 7 dollars on each unit. If you think about since marijuana is illegal you can only buy it from criminal; however, if it became legal you may have Marijuana stands like cigarette stands on the streets, giving people, who have a potential at farming, jobs. People can even get creative with them, like making bars for weed like bars for alcohol, where people can go in a smoking environment and buy marijuana and smoke them and cant leave while being high... You cant compare gambling with marijuana because gambling doesn't have medical benefits whatsoever, it even has a much more higher addiction rate than cannabis. According to common belief, Marijuana is considered as a gateway drug to more serious drugs like cocaine and heroine, which is wrong. According to drugpolicy.org " Marijuana does not cause people to use hard drugs. Marijuana is the most popular illegal drug in the United States today. Therefore, people who have used less popular drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and LSD, are likely to have also used marijuana. Most marijuana users never use any other illegal drug and the vast majority of those who do try another drug never become addicted or go on to have associated problems. Indeed, for the large majority of people, marijuana is a terminus rather than a so-called gateway drug. " In my opinion, doing cannabis, which has proved many and many times that it has medical uses, is better than doing any other drug or cigarettes, and I'm sure many marijuana and other drug users and non users would agree with that. You had made a point stating that there is little to no financial benefit in legalizing marijuana, I beg to differ, and so does the Huffington Post. According to an article about Marijuana, legalizing the drug will help the economy in a major way. " The states could see a major economic boon because of the legalization. The new measure is expected to bring the two states more than $550 million combined, with more than 300 economists previously estimating that legalizing pot could save the U.S. up to $14 billion a year...". The prohibition of the drug alone costs about 13.7 billion dollars a year, which can be used for more useful purposes than stop a "useful" drug. What if marijuana is legalized? That doesn't have to mean that every one will use it. Like anything else in the world, marijuana has its cons, but they are nothing compared to its health benefits. You said that mothers who are pregnant and smoked pot had problems with their babies. Just because marijuana is legal doesn't mean everyone, children, adults, pregnant women, grown men, will smoke it. Cigarettes and alcohol are legal and you don't see everyone smoking and drinking. In addition, unlike alcohol, overdosing on marijuana is virtually impossible. Furthermore, marijuana is known to help with depression, and reduce muscle pains with just the first joint. To conclude, weed is widespread anyway, instead of paying all this money and effort on trying to stop it why not think smart and give the people what they want while making profit and saving money to give poor people a better lifestyle? Sorry my answer took time, I was travelling

I am going to ignore your pathetic attempt to discredit me by pointing to my past debates and let that action speak for itself. However, I will point out that in order to have a complete understanding of the topic of marijuana legalization, all of these (and possibly more) subjects must be discussed regardless of debate.org's text limit. And seeing as how in many of my debates, even one without the format, I have encountered text limitation problems, I'd say the character amount is far from generous. And what does it matter if one round's subject must be addressed in another? Is there a rule against this? In typical prohibitionist fashion, you insist on generalizing in order to hide the topics which you do not or cannot address (because you do not address all of them). Also, the amount of characters necessary to point to at least the page of a provided article is negligible, yet you act as if it would ruin your arguments. You even ignore many of my arguments from the previous round that refute your arguments and continue on to repeat yours. Because of these deceitful strategies, I ask that you never accept any of my debate challenges again. The videos to my right are my sources (3) (4) and (5) respectively."Marijuana is one of the drugs when they looked into it and they found that it is addictive."You still fail to provide support for your claim. Let me show you why you must support such claims: I know of a study that proves your exact study wrong, they showed how your studies methods were inefficient and how the conductors of the studies had alternative motives. "This is incorrect because the cost of committing the crime creates deterrence from using a drug, specifically marijuana. Without these in place then more people would use the marijuana. [2]" Firstly, your article provides no support to your claim with regards to fully legalized and integrated marijuana. Simultaneously, my source (that you ignored in your entire response) uses real world economics and examples to support the opposite of your claim. Secondly, your source comes from the DEA, an amoral government agency that profits from the illegal drug trade and would lose billions upon marijuana (and other drug) legalization. "With taxed and regulated marijuana, federal and state governments would suddenly free up $26 billion spent annually on the failed drug war" (1). They destroy lives and harm innocents (even children) to combat the growing support and acceptance of integrated marijuana and keep it illegal (source (1) second paragraph). They support marijuana remaining a schedule 1 drug although marijuana is the exact opposite, and opposes any legitimate research (2). Furthermore the head of the agency refuses to answer simple questions regarding the topic and provides incredible inconsistencies in her responses (3) (4). Are the articles, sources, and claims of such an agency even credible? My source however comes from non-biased third parties (5)."The finding is “important information for public health and communication of the risk related to exposure to such materials.” [3]" Assuming the validity of these studies, they are irrelevant since it is impossible to die from smoking marijuana (6). In addition, it stands that any legitimate health risks from marijuana occur only in those with a predisposed disposition towards the health risk. And, you have failed to support your allegations with regards to addiction."As for the experiment in Alaska, I am arguing that marijuana must stay criminalized, so because it was decriminalized I must argue the negative effects of that since that is a step toward legalization." Your argument here is invalid for a few reasons. I created this debate and stated that it was for legalization not decriminalization and you accepted. Secondly, it is wholly irrelevant whether or not decriminalization is "a step towards legalization" or not. They are two different policies with completely different effects on society (as we can see in the Netherlands (7)). Finally, I made no such claim and nothing has been justified."Say I tax the product by 400%, now what are the chances people are going to purchase it legally?" We have no reason to believe such an absurd estimation of marijuana's would be tax rate. This is especially true since we have legal drugs (tobacco and alcohol) with reasonable and accepted tax rates.As for your source [4] reference. There is no evidence supporting that cannabis had any influence on these supposed increases, therefore the claim has no weight."Also on the DUI's, that was specifically marijuana only" irrelevant since you have ignored my previous arguments regarding marijuana and DUI's, likely attempting to draw attention away from it."Again, I am defending criminalization" already addressed."The strong form of marijuana that most of the young people smoke, he says, produces "a chronically passive individual—someone who is lazy, who doesn’t want to take initiatives, doesn’t want to be active." Since there is no evidence or suggestion that this supposed effect is permanent, it is only common sense to recognize that this supposed effect last only during intoxication. Additionally, that is a subjective analysis from an individual. And, once again, the DEA reference's credibility is in question. "It’s irrelevant that one is a good and one is not." Why is it irrelevant when a good with demand is objectively known to increase in prevalence following prohibition (5), while an act merely goes down due to enforcement? Please do not ignore my source on this matter."Overall drug use in the United States is down by more than a third since the late 1970s. That’s 9.5 million people fewer using illegal drugs. [2]" Once again, assuming there validity, these statistics are for all drugs and fail to give an accurate account for marijuana use alone (since that is what we are debating). And I have touched on the credibility of any DEA source."I have that source downloaded. I am also a historian and the fact is prohibition was more succesful than you think." I also have a source downloaded proving the existence of orange, intelligent elephants living on mars. I am also an astronaut and the fact is there is more alien life out there than you think. Please provide sources for such claims. "Since marijuana is wrong and bad conduct, it must be kept illegal." Why exactly is it wrong and "bad conduct" (fix your grammar there)?"My opponent's source is just simply wrong. This is a direct quote from one of the Founding Fathers." Wow, I am honestly surprised by your ignorance and attempt to legitimately pass a fallacy in a debate. You then proceed to use that same exact fallacy as support. Please explain how a site that merely list and describes the various fallacies is wrong? Perhaps you don't know what a fallacy is so I will define it. "Any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound" (8). I will provide another site stating the same thing since you didn't seem to like the other one (9). Your fallacy is the third one down, argument from authority. I need not address your quote from "one of DDO's greatest users" as it is also an argument from authority.Sources(1) http://readersupportednews.org...(2) http://leisureguy.wordpress.com...(3) http://www.youtube.com...(4) http://www.youtube.com...(5) http://www.youtube.com...(6) http://voices.yahoo.com...(7) http://www.erowid.org...(8) http://dictionary.reference.com...(9) http://www.theskepticsguide.org...

http://www.cannabisnews.org... Further more, I believe the use of marijuana is, in the majority, for status quo among young people. Should it be legalized, this would be more accesible to younger audiences. Thus creating a dangerous enviroment in whice no one could be 100% sure of their saftey and the safety of their children. Also, while the affects of marijuana are largely unknown, I myself have used marijuana and I know the negative affects it can cause. Mind you I have been clean of any drugs for over a year. In conclusion, I believe leagalizing marijuana is a bad idea for these reasons. Thank you for the opportunity to state my beliefs on such a controversial topic. Good luck to you.

I argue that Sponsoring or Funding Capitalist, Whore-mongering, Criminal Cartels by purchasing Marijuana, thus Crashing our economy of food, cloths, utilities, security, media, education and paraphilia which is the act of money laundering and gang affiliation through enabling and harbouring criminals who are selling drugs to children, womanizers, bigots, drug addicts, lazy spouses & depressed people Is a criminal offense that should not be legalized for the sake of the demography which is guilty of this offense. If Marijuana were to be legalized, then it should be done so with Zero correlation to the Decisions of the Criminal Population which has been Robbing the republic, empowering the cartels, thus tyrannizing and enslaving our working class, our food producers, our foreign associates and our officials. More over, It does create psychotic anomalies in the mind, which are nearly impossible to reprimand , in the same way that sexualizing a child is unreprimandble. Indicting that it is not just a criminal act, but an inhumane act to sell or legalize it. The Cartels are currently so powerful, making millions a day selling liquor, cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, porn and porn apparatus that they have influence in our media, in our politics, in our demographics and in our education system. Thus, introducing to this article of discussion, sex trafficking, robbery, violence, social bigotry, depression, economic insecurity (national and private). So. I am 100% against Marijuana Culture. and I would like someone to address each of these topics for what they, individually, and maintain their position of Pro with sustenance. If you fail to perceive any of these arguments, we have a 'comment' section to address your lapse in understanding [ As it is impossible to respond to a clause, if you do not know what clause you are responding to. ]. thank you, for taking on this debate challenge. Accepting before reading will undoubtedly be an automatic fail.


Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

Resolved: The Federal Government has the authority to legalize medical marijuana and industrialized hemp.

I will clarify the resolution to counteract my opponent's rephrasing. The resolution asserts that the Federal Government (US Federal Government) has the capability (not the obligation) to legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp. The "and/or" is included because the DEA prohibits both substances under the same classification, not recognizing industrialized hemp, which contains a non-psychoactive strain of cannabis with less than 1% THC, as a distinct category (. http://www.usdoj.gov...). The resolution is presented this way because medical marijuana and industrialized hemp can be addressed separately through the DEA and FDA. Advocacy groups for each have different concerns, with medical marijuana focused on patient needs and industrialized hemp on industry benefits. Thus, my resolution remains as originally stated.

Responding to my opponent's initial points would divert from my resolution. My argument does not support the legalization of medical marijuana; rather, it discusses the Federal Government's power to do so. My opponent argues that the government's duty is to protect citizens, implying this includes protection from self-harm. However, this does not challenge the government's power to legalize medical marijuana, as it has legalized other harmful substances in the past (alcohol, cigarettes, medical morphine, etc.). (. http://www.usdoj.gov...).

My opponent claims marijuana has a high abuse potential. While I agree that most medicines can be abused, alcohol has a higher potential for abuse and fewer medical uses than marijuana. (. http://en.wikipedia.org...). I will not debate the potential for abuse but will address the contention that medical marijuana lacks safety. Here are some medical organizations' views:

- The American Academy of Family Physicians supports marijuana use under medical supervision for specific indications.
- The American Medical Student Association urges the government to restore the Compassionate IND program for medical marijuana and reschedule it to Schedule II.
- The American Nurses Association supports safe patient access to therapeutic marijuana under prescriber supervision.
- The American Preventive Medical Association believes marijuana should be available for medicinal purposes in accordance with state law.
- The Belgian Ministry of Health states cannabis has medicinal uses and public health should prevail.
- The British Medical Association finds cannabinoids to be safe drugs with fewer side effects than many other medications.

Not only is marijuana widely accepted in the medical community as beneficial, but its side effects are less severe than those of other drugs, including Schedule II substances like cocaine, morphine, and methamphetamines

To answer your questions at the top:The war on drugs is far too serious, but I am on the pro side of stopping drugs. It should be illegal, but with lesser jail sentences (like 9 years instead of 10.)"We can pass laws against getting high in public."We've passed laws about not drinking and driving, public drunkenness, and not smoking in many facilities. And look how that turned out. It's time for an OVERLOAD OF REASONS!!!•Also, many people are trying to make tobacco illegal. In California, there are commercials and webpages all over that are trying to stop it. If smoking tobacco is bad, then smoking marijuana is just as bad. Both of them should be illegal due to health concerns. Also, driving while high is as bad as driving while intoxicated.•True, no one has ever died from smoking too much pot, but it made their lives a living hell. And that may be a bit worse than dying, pending your opinion on the afterlife. •As we both know, the world is trying ever so hard to stop cancer. Marijuana has 60% more cancer-causing particles than tobacco [1]. People smoking marijuana can get pregnant, leading to deformed babies whose lives will be very bad. •While marijuana has never killed anybody, 75 people per year are high on pot while they die. We do not know that this is a coincidence or not. [1]Those are all of the reasons I have today for you. It's been fun, and now it's up to the voters to see what they think![1] http://www.drugfreeworld.org...

"Marijuana is a very addictive drug; it is not as addictive as many other substances but it still is addictive." Let us quote some of my opponent's sources, shall we? "The majority of pot smokers do not develop a marijuana addiction, but some smokers do develop all the symptoms of an actual addiction after chronic marijuana use." (http://alcoholism.about.com...) "Only about 9% will have a serious addiction" (http://www.psychologytoday.com...) http://www.spiritualriver.com... says that out of all of the marijuana users, only 4% become addicted. As far as recoveryguy.hubpages.com goes, for some reason, I cannot access the server, and therefore am not able to quote it. "The reason that many people do not try it is because they do not have access to it or is too expensive for them to buy it from dealers." Obviously, my opponent does not know enough about marijuana to even argue this point. For only 10 dollars, you can purchase something known as a "dime bag", and it will usually have about 7 grams of marijuana in it. This will usually last someone with a medium to high tolerance for marijuana (me) about 3 or 4 days. In fact, I have known several dealers who will sell marijuana cigarettes (Joints) for only 3 dollars. They are also, at least from personal experience, rather easy to come by. Maybe you aren't in the right places? Marijuana is actually more liberally dispensed, because it is not regulated. "...but not everyone does, and others do not care about the damage they could do to themselves..." so are you implying that the government has to tell certain people how to live? If I want to kill myself, then I should have that right completely. "If you investigate further though you will see just exactly who is growing the Marijuana, it is not the states or the government... Tons of Marijuana is grown and the government is doing a rather crappy job of trying to limit access to it..." Limit it?! They are growing it! Let me direct you to a story that was recently on MSN, and also CBS news. "Americans get medical pot from the feds" http://www.cbsnews.com... As far as the marijuana being a cash crop thing, I am willing to let that go, it isn't a focal point to the debate, any way. "You make an assumption that all teenagers in rehabilitation centers were caught, arrested, and then given an unbalanced choice by a judge to then be forced into rehab..." I never said all, but it is the VAST majority. "...Marijuana could cause depression and feel physically weaker and lazier..." It is odd that you would name depression... "Marijuana Treats Depression Patients have, in numerous surveys and interviews, reported anti-depressant and anxiolytic effects of cannabis. Patients who use cannabis to "relax" may be treating the anxiousness sometimes associated with depression. Cannabis aids the insomnia sometimes present in depression and can improve appetite. Better pain control with cannabis can reduce chronic pain related depression." http://www.opposingviews.com... As far as lethargy goes, it is true that marijuana can cause that. But then again, so does: Alcohol, Hydrocodone, codeine, cough syrup, tobacco, Adderall, Ritalin, Paxil, and many more prescription drugs, but those are perfectly legal, and two are legal for recreational use. "As for the 2012 study, relax I made an honest mistake, it should have been 2009..." Well, then, let's quote that 2009 study, shall we? Cause of death1 Number All causes 2,436,652 Cardiovascular diseases 779,367 Malignant neoplasms 568,668 Drug induced2 37,485 Suicide 36,547 Motor vehicle accidents 36,284 Septicemia (infections) 35,587 by Firearms 31,224 Accidental poisoning 30,504 Alcohol induced 23,199 Homicide 16,591 Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 9,424 Viral hepatitis 7,652 Cannabis (Marijuana) 0 Bottom line is, there are plenty of legal substances, (Caffeine, alcohol, and tobacco, to name a few.) that are MUCH more dangerous, and have a MUCH higher addiction rate than marijuana, but they remain legal. Plenty of functioning members of society use or have used marijuana for medical or recreational reasons (Steve Jobs, The majority of our presidents, 42% of the American people, http://www.time.com...) and the country hasn't condensed and formed a black hole. 50% of Americans now say the use of marijuana should be made legal, (http://www.gallup.com...) and I completely agree. With the facts I have laid out in this debate, I feel like you should too. Thank you for your time! (:

I understand the Pro attacking my government sources since the government is against legalization of Marijuana. But not all the sites I listed are controlled by the government, the only one that is government controlled is drugabuse .gov, the other 5 websites i gave are independent sources that just like the Pro's sources only state the facts regarding Marijuana use and its dangers. Marijuana is a very addictive drug, it is not as addictive as many other substances but it still is addictive. http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org... http://www.spiritualriver.com... http://recoveryguy.hubpages.com... http://alcoholism.about.com... http://www.psychologytoday.com... All these sources are independent of the government and show that while Marijuana does not cause a majority of users to become addicted, Marijuana CAN be addictive "Also, if a substance is that harmful to your body, and it is something that people wouldn't do normally, what makes you think that legalizing that substance would cause more people to do it? If heroine were to become legal tomorrow, I still would not use it. I do not need the government to save me from myself, I am perfectly capable of taking care of myself." The reason that many people do not try it is because they do not have access to it or is too expensive for them to buy it from dealers. If like you said Heroin would become legal tomorrow, not everyone would immediately use it. How ever some people would use it because they now have access to it and may use it simply by urge or even from peer pressure. We dont need the government to take care of either of us because we are very smart people and know the harmful effects of Heroin, but not everyone does, and others do not care about the damage they could do to themselves. "Marijuana is generally in the top 10, if not the number one cash crop in pretty much every state in the union." You did not cite the source but it is true. If you investigate further though you will see just exactly who is growing the Marijuana, it is not the states or the government. People grow Marijuana (and lots of it) and the reason why it is considered a cash crop in many states is because of one report. http://www.drugscience.org... One person (who did not work for the government) estimated the value of Marijuana and then multiplied that number by how much is grown to calculate the enormous sum. People have illegally grown Marijuana and because it is an illegal substance it has a high price, but it is grown simply to be sold to others which classifies it as a cash crop. My point is, Marijuana is not being grown on wide open farms like cornfields in Iowa or Orange Groves in Florida and then sold to other countries for a price that is competitive to other nations exporting the same good. It is grown illegally indoors and in secret places like sheds with lights where people then sell it to other Americans for an ungodly high price because it is an illegal substance. http://stopthedrugwar.org... ^ that source may appear biased, but it just provides facts you can see for yourself. If you dont believe my argument consider this. 1 bushel = 30 to 60 lbs Amount of corn grown in the US = 9 to 10 billion bushels Amount of Marijuana grown (illegally) in the US = 1.5 million pounds were confiscated so estimating that only 10-20% of all grown Marijuana is found that would cause production to be between 7.5 to 15 million bushels Bushels of corn = 9 to 10 BILLION Bushels of Marijuana (guess) = 8 to 15 MILLION Price of one bushel of Corn = $2 to $3 Price of one bushel of Marijuana = $70,000!!!!!!!! :O http://www2.econ.iastate.edu... http://www.druglibrary.org... http://www.interstock.ru... http://www.cnbc.com... My point is, its not the states that grow all this weed, its illegal growers. The reason its the number one "cash crop" is because 1 bushel of weed is literally about 3000 times more valuable then 1 bushel of corn. Tons of Marijuana is grown and the government is doing a rather crappy job of trying to limit access to it. But since it is illegal the government has been limiting access to it, even if its only 10 to 20% You make an assumption that all teenagers in rehabilitation centers were caught, arrested, and then given an unbalanced choice by a judge to then be forced into rehab. That does happen but when you examine the teenage population (those who often go to rehab more than any other age group) it is often because their families have decided to put them in there and pay for it out of their own pockets. To assume that ALL teens are in rehab because they were ALL caught and were ALL given a choice of either rehab or jail is false. Marijuana deteriorates memory, attention, and learning skills http://psycnet.apa.org... http://www.springerlink.com... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... http://bubl.ac.uk... All are independent studies carried out bu universities and doctors with no government interference There is a difference in being emotionally creative and emotionally healthy. I was referring to how Marijuana could cause depression and feel physically weaker and lazier http://www.sciencedirect.com... http://www.jstor.org... http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org... As for the 2012 study, relax I made an honest mistake, it should have been 2009, http://drugwarfacts.org... I have provided many independent sources showing the dangerous side effects of Marijuana, and have only used statistics from what the Pro claims are questionable sites to show that the US should not legalize Marijuana

I believe that the reference to Amsterdam is another irrelevant issue. America is a completely different country and the outcomes of legalizing marijuana would be drastically different. Also, if marijuana was legalized the use of it will surely increase. Especially among teens, they will no longer be restricted from using this drug, therefore, it will be easier to purchase and they will definitely use it more openly. For example, the drinking age is 21, but of course under-age people still do consume alcohol. If the drinking age was dropped to 18, would that mean that less minors would consume alcohol? Absolutely not. Being that it would be legal to take this action, more teens would do it simply because obtaining it wouldn't be as much as a hassle as it was. Legalizing marijuana would in no way shape or form help lower the use of it, it would absolutely put a rise to this drug since it being illegal holds people back from doing it.

I accept. I, however, do not wish to argue that marijuana should be illegal; rather, I would like to contest that alcohol should remain legal with marijuana, which means that I am still, in essense, against the views of Pro.

Thank you for your response. In pro's argument she says: "Plus, it would be unrealistic and unproductive to criminalize anything that could be potentially harmful." It can be harmful in more ways than you think. We now have aproblem with drinking and driving. Can you imagine adding driving high and drunk to the list of problems. According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse: "According to the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 10 million people aged 12 or older reported driving under the influence of illicit drugs during the year prior to being surveyed.4 NSDUH findings also show that men are more likely than women to drive under the influence of drugs or alcohol. And a higher percentage of young adults aged 18 to 25 drive after taking drugs or drinking than do adults 26 or older.4" The institute also says: After alcohol, marijuana is the drug most often found in the blood of drivers involved in crashes. Tests for detecting marijuana in drivers measure the level of delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), marijuana"s mind-altering ingredient, in the blood. But the role that marijuana plays in crashes is often unclear. THC can be detected in body fluids for days or even weeks after use, and it is often combined with alcohol. The risk associated with marijuana in combination with alcohol, cocaine, or benzodiazepines appears to be greater than that for either drug by itself.3," The National Institute of Drug abuse is obviosly a credible source. Another problem is second hand smoke. Second hand smoke from cigarettes is bad but second hand smoke from marijuana can be equally or more damaging to others. The Canadian Cancer society says: "People who smoke marijuana tend to inhale more smoke per puff and hold it in their lungs for as much as 4 times longer than people who smoke tobacco cigarettes. This means that smoking 2"3 marijuana cigarettes can expose you to roughly the same amount of smoke as 20 tobacco cigarettes." This is also a very credible source. People have a right to do what they want but when it harms them and others it can not and should not be easily accessible. Pro argues that the country can profit off people harming there bodies. Cigarettes, alchol abuse, sugar, chemicals etc are already a problem. I don't think adding marijuana is a very smart desicion.

The problem with the prohibition of marijuana is that it is a double standard. When you measure the danger of substances available on the market you are basically drawing a line in the sand saying this one is good and this one is bad. The problem is that the people who decide this do it with an agenda that has nothing to do with the "danger" of using marijuana. Why else would so many terrible things cross the line and be considered "safe". What it comes down to is that typically pot smokers are your average people who live normal lives. Other than children smoking it, I really don't see what everyone is so afraid of. Dogma perhaps? I'm an idealist that can envision a world free of red bull, McDonald, and "happy hour"! It is free of religion, government, racism, sexism, homophobia, class systems, money, apathy, malice, Terrorism, war, cancer... etc! What I am proposing is that if you can give me a solution to the horrific monster under the bed, then I will lobby to stop people from smoking! You see where I am going. The problem with idealism is that it is personal. It will be opposed by many. Heck I think the NFL, and Nascar is the biggest waste of resources on the planet and would love to see Justin Beiber live in a 600 a month apartment. But I'm not trying to stand in the way of the fans. There are so many contradictions involved it has to be something other than its affect on people. Do you have any information in regards to why so many terrible things become mainstream and something as harmless as marijuana. (Moderation is key to almost everything in life: too much water and you will drown) Your argument about marijuana affecting students in an interesting point. My solution is let the schools handle it. Let the Universities regulate and educate about moderation. The main issue is that most of the people who want marijuana to be legal already smoke it regardless... bringing up the financial aspect. Do I even need to go into this. A gazillion U.S. Dollars have went to the black market fueling larger more dangerous enterprises. Instead of going back into the schools and law enforcement! Instead A Gazillion dollars is being siphoned into making sure people can drink themselves to death while bullying the lives of innocent people! Alcohol is addictive in ever sense of the word. Smoke weed everyday for 30 years and quit. It will probably suck but in short time you will wonder what the big deal was. Now try drinking everyday for 30 years and quit.. You should probably go to the hospital so you don't die! That is something that will haunt you the rest of your life. I'm going to say something extremely bold. I actually believe this statement. There are a lot of people that need to smoke that do not, Now I will counter that statement with there are a lot of people that shouldn't smoke but do. (The world is crazy like that) I guarantee you if a suicide bomber lit up a joint there is no way he would go through with it. That is not my strongest argument I will admit but you can see how everything is distorted and doesn't really add up? You are absolutely right many people can smoke and do great things. Some just shut down and become introverted. Which is still better than drunk and obnoxious! I agree that in your perfect world where all drugs and alcohol including cigarettes are illegal, marijuana should follow. But like I said until I see that I have a hard time telling people what to do. Especially If I have no idea what I'm talking about. In closing, I will need a little more from you to keep this going. So do some research and find out the REAL reason why marijuana is illegal, and convince me that it should be!

Thank you for your reply! Welcome to the DDO, I hope you are enjoying this debate. The reason why I made a difference between Cannabis and Marijuana, though Marijuana is always Cannabis, Cannabis is not always Marijuana. It makes it simpler with terms if we just call the whole thing Cannabis, the drug plant Marijuana and the product plant Hemp. Rebuttal: Pro's opinion on the topic seems to be that no one is getting hurt by Marijuana use. As I have displayed in my opening statement, smoking marijuana is harmful, it can cause cancer and is scientifically proven to cause things like Schizophrenia, memory loss, cognition impairment, bronchitis and many more. As it also is proven, teenagers using marijuana are actually comparably dumber than their non-smoking counterparts. This means that Marijuana does indeed cause harm, thus making a statement of 'no one is getting hurt' incorrect. Having concluded this, I will immediately get into one of pros later points, that people should be allowed to use Marijuana if they are not hurting anyone. This might be correct in theory, but they are hurting themselves, causing mental health issues. Now, even if we assume that it would not be wrong to hurt yourself, we still have the issue that when you hurt yourself you are indirectly hurting the people around you, family, friends and society in general. Thus meaning that Marijuana causes harm. Just to add a fun statistic, Colorado, pre legalization had a road accident fatality % of 7% involving Marijuana while post legalization had a % of 16%. Over 100% increase. I do not think this is a coincidence.. Especially if considered that there was a 14.8 percent decrease of road fatalities during the same time! Furthermore, marijuana users are twice as likely as non marijuana users to have suicidal thoughts. (http://www.rmhidta.org...) As I have pointed out, a marijuana legalization would most likely have a negative effect on economy. I would have no problem with hemp legalization, but I do have a grand problem with Marijuana legalization, as this would not have any positive impact. There might be a decrease in enforcement fees, though you would not see that money as it would be spent on things like hospital visits due to marijuana (Colorado experiencing a 82% increase of hospital visits due to marijuana), decreased workforce (Drug-related student suspensions/expulsions increased 32 percent from school years 2008-09 through 2012-13, the vast majority were for marijuana violations, this will affect the workforce), more vehicle accidents, substance abuse help, higher crime rate ( crime in Denver increased 6.7 percent from the first six months of 2013 to the first six months of 2014, In 2013, 48.4 percent of Denver adult arrestees tested positive for marijuana, which is a 16 percent increase from 2008). This seems to all come back to us, hitting the U.S. with a decrease in economy, not an increase as quoted by so many pro-legalization supporters. Colorado's statistics once again support this. Next up is the well favored argument that smoking marijuana is not lethal, nor harmful if used correctly. Statistics regarding schizophrenia, decreased capabilities as well as cancer beg to differ. Also stating that smoking marijuana is not lethal is stupid. I could say that speeding is not lethal, what kills you is the crash. It is the stupidity that kills you, not the action. If someone is high and crashes their car, was it lethal then? Or was it the car accident that killed them? Think about it, if they weren't under the influence they most likely would not have crashed. Thus rendering this incorrect. As for the next point, that there is a large numbers of medical uses. Yes, that may be correct, but the number of disadvantages is higher than the number of advantages. Furthermore, this statement "and if you get medicated and fall asleep chances are when you wake up your not medicated anymore so these drug testing laws do more bad than good too since many lose their jobs to this." makes no linguistic nor logical sense. I think it is most certainly appropriate, living myself in a country with a large mining industry in which the workers are tested regularly and if tested positive will loose their job as they are endangering others, that there is a penalty for driving under marijuana influence, as it is as dangerous as driving under the influence of alcohol. I agree that synthetic marijuana is dangerous, but so is the real stuff. Also, as I have proven above, marijuana has killed plenty of people, indirectly. On the other hand there is a supposed increase of 75-289%, also including many kids. Stating that kids would not have access is incorrect, as shown once again by the case of Colorado, with an 26% increase in youth (12-17 years old) marijuana use since legalization. As I have also already stated there was an increase of 32% drug related suspensions since legalization. As I also have already stated, there is a difference in marijuana usage in legalized states to non legalized states, a 40% difference, meaning that there are 40% more teen marijuana users in states were marijuana is legalized than in other states. Also to note, that the top 16 states with monthly teenage marijuana use in 2012 were all states in which medical marijuana was legalized, with many having an over 100% difference than non medical marijuana states. This should prove the statement of restricted sale incorrect. In fact, teen users would increase dramatically. I will not argue that drug education is far from perfect, but this is often caused by uneducated pro marijuana advocates as well as their con counterparts. The thing is that experience does not necessarily create knowledge, meaning that only because you have smoked marijuana a couple of times does not mean you know anything about health issues or anything else like that, though this seems to be the opinion of many pro marijuana advocates. As for your Mexican statement, marijuana has been in U.S. history since as early as 1619 when by decree of King James I every colonist had to plant 100 plants for export. Marijuana was not brought from mexico, it was well present in society and used. The prohibition in the 1930's was a response to apparent increased usage of marijuana by teenagers of the time. And I am sure that teens pre the 20th century would have used it. The main source I used for this was a case analysis of the Colorado legalization. This is an unbiased source providing statistical evidence. (http://www.rmhidta.org...) In conclusion pro was not able to refute any of my statements brought forward in my opening statement and seemingly acted more with opinion than actual scientific evidence. Furthermore he was not able to dismiss the economics I proposed in my opening statement, nor had any comment about any of the health issues proven by science but seemingly just put out opinion, which thus refuted the majority comments he made in the 2nd round already in my opening statement without pros comments even been having made at the time.

You had a semi-smart topic, but no facts to back it up. "Marijuana makes you less motivated," Without any form a source, I'll simply say that this is a ridiculous assumption, and my argument will not change until you come up with a source. "so if everybody did it, nobody would want to do anything. " The legalization of Marijuana is not about everybody smoking, it is about a certain percentile. If you can bring me a percentile that states that if Marijuana was legalized, then 100% of people would smoke it, then your argument would hold more water with me. "I've seen several studies in which Marijuana has shown a significant impact on the motivational side of the human brain. " I'm not sure that there is even a "motivational" side to the brain. Maybe you are referring to the left side of the brain? In any case, I need sources. My opponent has not suggested anything logical whatsoever, and I hope he decides to do so within the next round considering that it is the last one.

I will reiterate my comment: that, this debate is geared towards the demographics, not the ideology, of marijuana use. All my previous arguments, in turn are yet to be addressed, and doing so is a prerequisite to this debate. As, disregarding contributed arguments is bigoted, insolent, arrogant and impudent (each), and thus this would no longer be considered a DEBATE. as in a debate, the winner doesn't win based on inconsideration and pompous self-satisfaction, they win only By over-turning the content contributed in one way or another. Regarding the use of Medical Marijuana. Medical marijuana does not conclusively Cure any afflictions. I have never seen any research indicating that, nor any Medical Publications. (I would love for you to provide me with A CREDIBLE publication that is not second, third or fourth hand, But is directly from this Credible source. Please, as it is YOUR argument. ) I personally knew a man who died of Colon + liver cancer who smoked Marijuana routinely. I knew another heavy smoker who died of leukemia. Yet for the terminally ill. Who are we indeed, to deny this pain relief. Yet, despite I have not fought against this right, It should also not be administered or prescribed, as it can cause Great mental strife and physical trauma. As I stated, I have both had my brain bleed, and have had a heart attack. Job creation is not real. As pre-existing establishments would by default inherit this market (example: Monsanto's [actual example, Canada]). The only other people entering this market would be Pre-existing illegal cartels. To remain legal is financially expensive. This is not a job creation sector. IN fact, the rise in Market Distributers would complicate the tax system, and excessive corruption would arise, where a solution had been sought to be installed. Marijuana does in fact have a predisposition to induce psychosis on all Humans. That is a scientific fact. Some people, however, simply, mask their delusion, insolence, selfishness, Perversion and Psychotic symptoms. Ticking-Time-Bombs, Suicides, Crooks, Bigots, Asshols, Sloths, Gluttons, Jackasses. .. That is a fact, that Marijuana does have this disposition to inflict Psychosis, and merely the individual copes uniquely.


Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

It is proposed that all substances should be decriminalized. The legalization of all substances is necessary. If the government can dictate what I can and cannot ingest, it suggests that the state possesses me and I am subservient to the government. Substance use is a personal choice. Numerous substances have various applications - for leisure, medicinal purposes, or religious rites. The prohibition of substances has been highly detrimental; it consumes a significant amount of public funds, has devastated countless families, and has utterly failed to curb substance use. Neither should an individual who wishes to consume substances be hindered from doing so. Individuals should have the autonomy to determine how they wish to conduct their lives, provided they do not harm others or their property.

There are many arguments for both sides, let's hope we have an interesting and engaging debate. I'll begin with a bit of topic analysis: The resolution is as follows "All drugs should be legalized. " This means we're not only debating the legalization of Marijuana or Shrooms, but also the legalization of hard drugs that cause real psychological, physiological, and neurological damage, like Heroin and Crack Cocaine. Let's go through his arguments, point by point. "1. They can be taxed, more income that people would be happy to pay. " What makes you think that there wouldn't be a black market for drugs, even if they were legalized? There is a very lucrative black market for guns, it wouldn't be any different for drugs. Furthermore, what you're in essence saying is that it is good for the government to make money off of depraved and deranged addicts who will do anything for another fix. "2. Many of them are harmless in the short term. " Sure, but we're debating ALL drugs, not SOME drugs or MANY drugs. Heroin is devastating from the first time it is injected or inhaled, same goes for Cocaine, Crack, and LSD. Furthermore, if the drugs are laced with other substances we can't even guarantee that an inhalation of a relatively harmless drug like Marijuana will be "harmless. " "3. We've wasted more money on the war on drugs than we would have simply TREATING addicts and ignoring casual users. " I agree with you, but this is not an argument for legalization. It is an argument that advocates for a new approach to drug crime legislation, an approach that would focus on rehabilation over retribution. "4. Most of these drugs are only psychologically addictive (Weed, Shrooms, etc) and are no more dangerous than chocolate. " Psychological addictions can be just as devastating as physical ones, first of all, and patterns of abuse can occur very easily. Secondly, while "most" might only be psychologically addictive, many others are physically addictive, and these ones are the worst ones. In a debate over the legalization of all drugs, there is no way that this is an argument for Pro. "5. There is actually little conclusive evidence supporting many of the claims made by anti-drug persons. My own father claimed marijuana causes testicular cancer (when most research has actually shown is cures cancer, or prevents it)" What? Do you have any evidence that the claims made by anti-drug advocates are false? Do you have any evidence that shows that "most research has actually shown that [marijuana] cures cancer, or prevents it"? This is a ludicrous argument, baseless at best. "6. By taking the illegality away we would destroy the underground drug markets, all of the drug related deaths around the world would CEASE to exist because drug cartels no longer have power since clean industrial production would be created. " This is false, as I demonstrated earlier when I cited the black market centered around arms smuggling. Even if drugs were legalized there would still be an underground market for them, perhaps for cheaper prices or for a way to get around government restriction. In fact, if we gave more power to "clean industrial production" you can guarantee the drugs might get even more dangerous, packed with nicotine like cigarettes are. Marijuana would become physically addictive! As can be seen, each argument my opponent gives can be neatly rebutted with an obvious and clear counter-argument. My opponent goes on to say that since we can do things like buy cigarettes and vote at 18, we should be able to get addicted to heroin and ruin our lives at 18, too. Obviously his position endorses irresponsibility and societal unrest. For these reasons I urge a Con vote.

My opponent, Myzory, has made only one, single assumptive argument. He asserts that marijuana use should be classified as a personal right. This however, is not so -- the government is obligated to step in. When events get so out of control that local and state governments are not able to do what's best for the people, the federal government must step in. Not wearing a seat belt for instance, is illegal. Instead, it is a mandatory action even though some may think it to be a violation of personal rights. However, the evidence to prove that it saves lives is conclusive, and so it stays. That is assuming, however, that marijuana is bad for you. And it is. The Health Canada team reported in December 2007 that cannabis has more toxins than tobacco, another drug that The World Health Organization says accounts for 26% of male deaths in developed countries. In fact, the study concluded that marijuana smoke contained 20 times more ammonia, and five times more hydrogen cyanide and nitrogen oxides than tobacco smoke. In January 2008, Dr. Matthew Naughto and his team reported that marijuana smokers tended to develop lung cancer as much as 24 years earlier than tobacco users. In July 2007, the popular medical research journal, The Lancet, published an article that concluded that cannabis users had a 41% increased chance to suffer from phycosis. Not to mention, marijuana use has also been linked to depression, schizophrenia, bronchitis, and emphysema. The experts agree too. Bob Weiner, a Drug Issue Strategist at the Office of National Drug Control Policy, says that, "(The movement against Marijuana has) done a lot to make us safer and it's one of the reasons why we have record low crime numbers, and why we have record low drug abuse." He continues, "Marijuana is the number one drug where teens must seek treatment in hospitals... it's the number two cause of car crashes." Marijuana is not bad for you? Preposterous! Marijuana, as I have proven, is more harmful than tobacco, a drug that kills 26% of male deaths in developed countries. Thank God marijuana is not more widespread then it is! Thank God not as many people have died. The government needs to step in, just as steps in for cocaine and heroin. You, the audience, must vote for me thus far because I have successfully defeated my opponent's only arguments, and have provided significant proof as to why marijuana should stay illegal.

This drug should stay illegal for many reasons concerning the health and safety of Americans today. Saying no one ever died from smoking marijuana is like saying no one ever died from smoking tobacco. Today research shows that nearly 50 percent of teenagers try marijuana before they graduate from high school. Most young teens and children start using marijuana for many reasons, they are curious, or want to fit in to a specific group of kids. Most young people who already smoke cigarettes and/or use alcohol are at higher risk for marijuana use. Most young people say they use marijuana to deal with psychological problems such as, anger, boredom, depression, anxiety, etc. As much as young people think marijuana is helping their problems, its only making things worse for their bodies and minds. When using marijuana, some users suffer acute anxiety and have paranoid thoughts, this mainly occurs with some one new to the drug or in a strange environment. In some cases, a user who has taken a very high dose of marijuana can have severe psychotic symptoms and need emergency help. Marijuana delay's the user's short term memory, which means they may have trouble handling simple or complex tasks. Due to the effects that marijuana has on the mind, the user my find themselves in a difficult situations such as they could become involved in risky sexual behavior or take part in auto crashes. When you smoke marijuana and then drive or even perform both, many of the skills required for safe driving, may be changed such as, alertness, concentration, coordination and reaction time. These effects can last up to 24 hours after smoking marijuana. Marijuana may also make it difficult to judge distances and react to signals and sounds on the road. A recent study of patients in a shock-trauma unit who had been in traffic accidents revealed that 15 percent of those who had been driving a car or motorcycle had been smoking marijuana, and another 17 percent had alcohol in they're system. Marijuana can direct the human mind to make wrong or a dangerous choice but it also can damage our bodies. The body can be damaged, just as easy as the mind loses its control over the choices it makes. Findings so far show that the regular use of marijuana or THC may play a role in cancer and problems in the respiratory, immune system, and reproductive systems. It is hard to find out whether marijuana alone causes cancer because many people who smoke marijuana smoke cigarettes and use other drugs. Marijuana smoke contains some of the same cancer-causing compounds as tobacco, sometimes in higher concentrations. Studies have shown that five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes a day. Tobacco smoke and marijuana smoke may work together to change the tissues lining the respiratory tract. Marijuana smoking could contribute to early development of head and neck cancer in some people. Cases of cancer, including cancer of the mouth, tongue, larynx, jaw, head, neck, and lungs have been reported in young marijuana smokers. Our immune system protects the body from many diseases, when marijuana is smoked it impairs the ability of T-cells in the lungs, causing someone with a disease more susceptible to other illnesses or diseases. Continued us of marijuana can lead to abnormal function of the lungs or airways. Scientists have found signs of lung tissue injured or destroyed by marijuana smoke. Marijuana and tobacco both cause many of the same breathing problems, both of them are addictive. While not everyone who uses marijuana becomes addicted, when a user begins to seek out and take the drug frequently they're known to be dependent on the drug. A withdrawal syndrome occurs, consisting of anxiety, depression, sleep and appetite disturbances, irritability, tremors, diaphoresis, nausea, muscle convulsions, and restlessness. Some serious users of marijuana show signs of dependence because when they do not use the drug, they develop withdrawal symptoms. Some users experiencing marijuana withdrawal had symptoms, such as restlessness, loss of appetite, trouble with sleeping, weight loss, and shaky hands. According to one study, marijuana use by teenagers who have prior serious antisocial problems can quickly lead to dependence on the drug. That study also found that, for troubled teenagers using tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana, progression from their first use of marijuana to regular use was about as rapid as their progression to regular tobacco use, and more rapid than the progression to regular us of alcohol. Researchers are not certain whether a newborn baby's health problems are caused by marijuana will continue as the child grows. Preliminary research shows that children born to mothers who used marijuana regularly during pregnancy may have trouble concentrating. Doctors advise pregnant women not to use any drugs because they might harm the growing fetus. Some scientific studies have found that babies born to marijuana users were shorter, weighed less, and had smaller head sizes than those born to mothers who did not use the drug. When a nursing mother uses marijuana, some of the THC is passed to the baby in her breast milk. This is a matter for concern, since the THC in the mother's milk is much more concentrated than that in the mother's blood. This along with the other information on how marijuana is harmful gives us another reason for not legalizing it. Marijuana should not be legalize for the safety of Americans and their health. Marijuana destroys the minds of many users. All parts of the body especially the immune system are damaged from marijuana. Marijuana can cause many of the same illnesses cigarettes cause. So in conclusion I believe that for the well being of the American people marijuana should stay illegal to ensure the safety of our future. --------------------- Habakkuk 3:17-18

Okay yeah you make a valid argument saying that we should restrict most substances that can be abused. But the thing is... marijuana is still being abused no matter what we do. Even if we take extreme measures against marijuana use, people will still continue to use it. Also marijuana isn't addictive so it doesn't really affect our decisions when we aren't high. Also another common misconception that is made is that when people smoke weed they go out of the house and get into trouble and put other people in danger. But that's not the case. When someone smokes weed the only thing they want to do is sit at home, eat a lot of food, and watch movies. Yeah that also intrigues the argument that people are much less productive when they're high. When someone's high they are much more creative. They come up with come with some very useful product and ideas.

I would like to begin by defining a couple of terms. If my opponent disagrees with my definitions, then he/she can suggest and justify alternative definitions, however terminology should be agreed upon within the first half of the debate. I will not use dictionary definitions; let us just keep it simple. Possession means owning something. Use means smoking/inhaling/eating/vaporizing/etc. marijuan. Recreational marijuana means that adults ABOVE THE AGE OF 21 YEARS OLD are allowed to purchase up to SEVEN GRAMS of marijuana for any reason, with no medical conditions required. Legalized means that we remove the penalties from marijuana activities and that we regulate marijuana in dispensaries at which consumers of age can purchase it. The U. S. refers to all fifty states of the United States of America; the resolution seeks to essentially overturn the national ban on cannabis. The framework for this round should be net benefits. Unless my opponent is able to demonstrate that the costs of legalizing marijuana in the U. S. overwhelmingly outweigh the benefits, the Pro should win the round. Contention 1: Economic Benefits. Legalizing pot allows the United States to allow a wealth of economic benefits in the form of tax revenue and also in the form of liberating costly prisoners from incarceration. We have already seen examples of collecting revenue. According to the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), between January 2014 and October 2014, Colorado accrued 40 million dollars of tax revenue by legalizing marijuana and allowing 21+ citizens to purchase it. Suppose that we extrapolated legalization to the whole country. According to the Huffington Post, this would result in $8.7 billion per year in the form of state and federal taxes. Taxing any good or service allows the economy to grow, because it provides money that is uesd for other programs. In the case of marijuana legalization, these programs translate to education, health care, and drug addiction treatment, valuable impacts in our society. Furthermore, legalizing marijuana prevents costs that are associated with incarcerating individuals. According to the DPA, approximately 750 thousand citizens are arrested for an infraction of marijuana law each year. Furthermore, the cost of incarceration is $47,000 per prisoner per year. This translates to 7 to 10 billion dollars per year that are wasted on locking up stoners (rather than rapists or murderers). Clearly, not only does legalizing marijuana create money; keeping it illegal costs money. This 35 billion dollars could be used to reduce the national deficit, solve other crimes, or perhaps reduce taxes on American citizens. Contention 2: Legalizing marijuana reduces crime. Legalizing marijuana prevents police officers from wasting their time arresting harmless stoners, when they could be spending these efforts and resources fighting actually dangerous crimes, such as murder, theft, or rape. According to RollingStone Magazine, marijuana arrests are no longer real "police work"; law enforcement would rather spend their time tackling other crimes such as murder and rape. This argument is intuitive rather than logical; less time wasted on activity X (stopping pot smoke) leads to more time available for activity Y (stopping murder). LearnLiberty echoes this message: "legalizing marijuana frees up resources to solve other crimes". The impact is clear: a reduction in violent crimes that hurt American citizens, if the U. S. is smart enough to legalize pot. Contention 3: Legalizing marijuana reduces or eliminates racial discrimination in law enforcement. It should be clear to the layperson that most marijuana arrests are against racial minorities, particularly blacks. A black individual is no more likely to use pot than a white person but, in Washington D. C. , is over 8 times more likely to be arrested for it. This is what one could refer to as a Jim Crowe system; blacks suffer from mass incarceration much more than whites do, but they do not commit any more wrongdoings than whites. In order to provide for an American system of equality of opportunity and justice without regard to skin color, marijuana should be legalized. This will prevent irrationally suspicious police officers from locking up "dangerous blacks" (who, in truth, are not the least bit dangerous; they are just minding their own business); this racist enforcement is unethical, discriminatory, and clearly non-beneficial. Contention 4: Regulated marijuana is healthier marijuana. When alcohol was prohibited (i. e. before the 1920's), this led to an extensive black market whereby Americans still found ways to produce, purchase, and enjoy alcoholic beverages such as rum and beer. The same phenomenon occurs with marijuana. Even if marijuana is perceived to be dangerous, keeping it illegal does not deter its use. In fact, the criminal nature of cannabis provides a compelling reason for drug cartels to enter the country and sell cannabis, with no regard to whether the weed is tainted with dangerous chemicals like PCP. Since the illegality of marijuana fails to have any deterrent effect, legalizing pot will allow the government to closely control and regulate it. This allows for high-quality marijuana, meaning that consumers will enjoy marijuana that has no dangerous chemicals in it and that achieves standards of safety and health. This makes it a safer option. The influx of drug cartels is associated with the trade of weapons and also with violence, coercion, and sometimes murder. It is easier for a teenager to obtain a joint than it is for him to obtain a can of beer. Since Americans smoke pot regardless of whether or not it is legal, we should legalize it so that citizens purchase it from trusted, regulated dispensaries rather than untrustworthy, sketchy black-market dealers. Contention 5: Americans have freedom of choice. An American citizen should be able to do whatever she want, so long as her actions do not infringe upon the rights of others. Even if skeptics were successfully able to argue that smoking pot is harmful (which I would disagree with), Americans can choose to engage in harmful activities, as long as the others in society do not feel the effects of these choices. People are allowed to eat candy, drink beer, watch TV all day, and smoke cigarettes. Why should we limit the behavior of an individual simply due to archaic notions without any substantial evidence? Marijuana is used for a wide variety of medicinal and leisure purposes, and its effects have been described as uplifting, stress-relieving, and relaxing. To keep marijuana illegal is at variance with the pursuit of happiness that Thomas Jefferson had in mind when America was established as an independent nation. If individuals want to smoke pot, they should be able to do so, particularly in the privacy of their own homes. For many citizens, occasional marijuana use improves the quality of their lives and has medicinal benefits. Some who need it for medical use are too impoverished to afford to obtain a medical recommendation from their doctors, making their medicinal options severely limited. Keeping marijuana illegal is an invasion of privacy. In short, to legalize pot is to provide Americans with the freedoms of choice and discretion and the liberty that they deserve. I have posted evidence below that substantiates my claim. In short, the legalization of marijuana leads to benefits that address the economy, other crimes, racism, national safety, and the freedom of choice. These are all significant benefits that contribute to my proposed framework of "net benefits". A reason why keeping marijuana illegal is disadvantageous is equivalent to a reason why making marijuana legal is advantageous. Too many dollars are wasted in prohibition. Too many lives are locked up in prohibition. To many blacks and Hispanics are unfairly arrested in prohibition. Too many drug cartels enter the U. S. in prohibition. Finally, too many freedoms and basic liberties are violated in prohibition. For these reasons, the possession, use, and sale of recreational marijuana should be legalized in the U. S. Please vote Pro. I await Con's contentions. . https://www.drugpolicy.org... . http://www.huffingtonpost.com... . http://www.drugpolicy.org... . http://www.rawstory.com... . http://www.rollingstone.com... . http://www.learnliberty.org... . https://www.washingtonpost.com... . http://www.collegiatetimes.com...

Another reason that marijuana should not be legalized because it could cause young children to think that it's ok to do drugs. Legalizing drugs is like telling a teen it's ok to engage in risky behavior, when drugs are involved, there is an increase of possible death or permeant injury. I'll agree that prescribed drugs are just as easily abused, but this drug should be used due to its "safe" use, when actually it could cause serious problems later on in life or cause a serious reaction due to a existing medical condition. Again this can happen with prescribed drugs, but the drug in question is just as dangerous as herion and cocaine.

The Bible is such an old book. It is not to be trusted. Only an utter fool would believe it. Are you a fool? I thought not. No man would refuse to smoke marijuana unless he was too rich to know that it's good for him. If marijuana is made illegal, it will cause a chain reaction leading to the destruction of all life as we know it! Don't you understand? If marijuana is made illegal, freedoms will be restricted. The children of America need their freedoms! Why would you rob such a thing from the poor, helpless children? But on the other hand, if you smoke marijuana every day, you will free the children from their burdens. You will be the most honored person in the world. But if you do not, you will surely die. I said that my opponent believes in a talking snake. Just one. But NO snake can talk, since I've never even seen one. God told me that he does double tests sometimes. Therefore, God only placed marijuana on earth to test the people who think they are being tested. The real test is to smoke it. Sort of like sex. Marijuana is a lot like sex: it's tons of fun and has great practical results. But let's stop talking about God. No one can even DEFINE God, for God's sake. Hitler didn't smoke marijuana. Hitler killed people. It is clear that all murderers also do not smoke marijuana and all people who do not smoke marijuana are murderers. Haven't you seen all those people on the news who murder people and don't smoke marijuana? Global warming stopped in 1998. This is God's way of saying that we should smoke marijuana. 100% of people who do not smoke marijuana eventually DIE. It is a terrible fate that they reach. Only through marijuana can we be liberated. Some drugs have negative consequences, but marijuana is different. Marijuana is great. Everyone knows it. There is no use denying it. If you deny it, that makes you an undead monkey. You don't want to be an undead monkey. Why does happiness exist? Marijuana! What makes the grass green? Marijuana! These are objective observations; my opponent's subjective ramblings should be ignored. Read the proof for Fermat's Last Theorem. It clearly proves that marijuana should be smoked regularly. My opponent must not only negate the resolution, but he must also disprove Fermat's Last Theorem in order for him to receive the vote. Notice that my opponent can be directly quoted to have said "smoke marijuana. " Even he advocates for my case. I ask my opponent: When you rejected all morality, were you smoking marijuana? I didn't think so. I remind the reader of the correlation between marijuana and utter bliss. My opponent has not made any arguments contrary to my position (actually he's helped my case). Since there is no contrary evidence, I am the obvious victor. My opponent advocates suffering and pain. I advocate happiness and glory. The choice is clear.

As a roadmap, I will first answer both of my opponent's challenges, and then move on to the problems with his case. So without further adu: "Smoking marijuana increases the body's production of a protein that raises levels of blood fats associated with heart attack and stroke, government researchers report. The finding helps explain the increased risk of such cardiovascular problems found in previous studies of marijuana", said Dr. Jean Lud Cadet, chief of the Molecular Neuropsychiatry Research Branch of the National Institute of Drug Abuse. He is lead author of the report. This and many other related articles can be found on health.usnews.com. The following link contains an article about the stroke of Zachariah after his marijuana use: http://stroke.ahajournals.org... Both of these answer my opponents first challenge. Now to move on to his second. First, I cannot provide a specific medication without knowing the exact sickness. However, I will provide some examples for some different illnesses. Glucosamine Chondroitin has been known to treat pain EFFECTIVELY with NO side effects. Celadrin – or cetyl myristoleate, is another proven medication. Having responded to ALL of my opponent's challenges, completely defended my own case, I will now attack his. My opponent challenged me to provide a medication with no side effects. I have done this. He does not, however, show that marijuana has no side effects. I have proven that it does. (See Zachariah incident) Because I have provided for a SAFE alternative, that accomplishes the same benefits of marijuana, I can see no reason to legalize it. It permanently damages the body, and people's lives are never the same. I now have a challenge for my opponent. What are the benefits of marijuana that cannot be achieved with any safe alternative? Unless my opponent can answer this, there is no reason to vote affirmative. Because marijuana accomplishes nothing that cannot be achieved by my safe alternatives, I must negate.

I argue that drug use in the US should be fully legalized, legalizing all forms of drugs, not simply marijuana. I have the burden of proof to convince voters that fully legalizing all drugs makes logical sense.

IntroductionI would like to begin by thanking jamccartney for choosing to debate this topic with me once again. In our last debate ( http://www.debate.org... ) there were external factors that caused it to not be a very sophisticated debate. I was on vacation. The motel had horrible internet. Now after that debate has been completed, and our opinions have strengthened and we have matured, we can debate this again. I thank jamccartney again for accepting. Main Argument As you know, I am a supporter of marijuana usage for medical purposes. My opponent is not. Even after the last debate, I still do not understand how he can oppose it. My opinions have strengthened since then and I hope to persuade my opponent, the viewers, and the judges that my stance is the correct one.I will begin by defining what marijuana is. According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, marijuana is "[t]he cannabis plant" or "[a] preparation made from the dried flower clusters and leaves of the cannabis plant, usually smoked or eaten to induce euphoria." We will utilize both definitions in this debate. Why is this? Well, medical marijuana comes in all shapes and forms. It can be smoked, injected, eaten, or otherwise consumed by drinking or other methods. Marijuana can be used to successfully treat the following things: "1. Treatment for symptoms of AIDS 2. Glaucoma 3. Neuropathy (diseases affecting the nerves or nerve cells) Ex. epilepsy 4. Nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy 5. Pain caused by structural or psycho-physiological disorders 6. Muscular spasticity and limb pain (multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury) 7. Symptoms of movement disorders such as Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease, Tourette’s syndrome 8. Appetite stimulant for diseases of malnutrition (cachexia or starvation) 9. Nausea and vomiting (general) 10. Migraine headaches" Now, I believe my opponent is aware that marijuana is a drug not commonly connected with overdoses. I do not believe he has ever heard of an overdose of medical marijuana or addiction to it because neither have I or most people on this Earth. If he believes it is unsafe, he is not aware of the facts. My source says, "[t]he Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not approved smoked cannabis for medical reasons. Although some aruge that this is a political decision, rather than a medical or scientific decision based on research and analysi, the FDA has approved two drugs, Marinol and Cesamet, for therapeutic uses in the U.S. These drugs contain active ingredients that are present in botanical marijuana but come in the form of a pill. Nonetheless, that the FDA has not approved smoked marijuana for any condition or disease seems rather short-sighted." One can easily be addicted to pills, tablets, serums, and other forms of medications, but medical marijuana is rarely a substance that is addicted to. I do not deny that marijuana, when used in a large amount, is damaging, but you are aware that medical marijuana overdoses and addictions are virtually unheard of, yes? In my previous debate about this topic, I said, "[h]owever, medical marijuana is the only known medicine today that can successfully diagnose epilepsy. [M]odern epilepsy medicines often fail and cannabis is often the better choice. It is virtually unheard of that there is a thing such as a marijuana overdose. It does not simply occur. However, overdoses can easily occur when taking pills, tablets, or serums." Marijuana, when abused and overused, will be termination instead of salvation. I argue, however, that medical marijuana can be salvation for victims of epilepsy and other such conditions when used properly. Marijuana, like other plants, of course, can be bred in order to have certain traits. Recreational marijuana makes you high and has no health benefits for the user. However, marijuana can be bred to have a low percentage of chemicals that cause you to be high and a high percentage of chemicals that affect the desired parts of the body in question. Marijuana has two main components: THC and CBD. CBD (cannabidiol) will reduce brain activity and will lower the occurances of seizures.THC is what causes one to be high. Breeding marijuana to have low THC and high CBD will be effective. This, along with other genetic modifications, will make marijuana a safe treatment. I believe I have made my point. I did rush this argument a little for I did not have much time, but I believe my argument is sufficient. I now close my argument and allow my opponent to commence his statements. Bibliography"Cannabis (drug)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 2 May. 2014. <en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana/>. Dictionary of the English Language. Fourth Edition ed. : Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000. Print."Top 10 medical uses for marijuana ." . Addiction Blog, 8 Feb. 2011. Web. 2 May 2014. <http://drug.addictionblog.org...;.