Marijuana should be legal

Rebuttals In the beginning of Pro's argument, he said, "[d]eath from marijuana is very rare , do you seriously think that people don't know that cannabis can be harmful for your body [sic]?" Now, I want to first point out that he did not give any proof of this, for he did not cite any sources. Secondly, according to CBS News, marijuana recently triggered the deaths of two men in Berlin (CBS News). Furthermore, Next, Pro said this: Why would anoyone think that it will magically change because 'marijuana killing people' marijuana sales will change over time maybe go down maybe go up maybe stay similar but i can gurantte that people will not stop smoking it because 'marijuana killing people' [sic]. I will begin by pointing out the major thing wrong this sentence: Grammar. If I recall from round 1, I said: "Proper grammar and spelling should be used at all time." Though Pro told me he is incapable of spacing his paragraphs, he said nothing about punctuation and run-on sentences. Because of that, I have to believe that he has defied my rules. The next thing I would like to point out is the validity of the statement. Pro wants to know why marijuana sales would go down. I will restate my reason from round 4: "Though it does not kill people like tobacco and alcohol does, it will cause people to do stupid things, which will essentially lead to death, suicide, et-cedra." When the customers die, they will be incapable of buying, hence lowering the sales. "Another thing i would like to adress is that even if magically marijuana didn't produce money so what? how will that negatively effect you?[sic]" Taxes. Economy. Must I say more? "I guess you are not very good at trying to cover something since if anyone is actually following this debate knows that i have rebutted your point about this on the last round .[sic]" Indeed, you refuted that point, but were wrong. I am correct in my statement while you are not. "Oh than lets ban guns , knifes and anything that can harm people , the difference here is it only directly harms anyone who chooses to take it , if you see someone snorting cocaine does that harm you?" I will allow you a win on that point. After that, Pro quoted my statement about people being hired, which would benefit the economy. Then, he refuted it: "First of all if anyone want's to be a policemen he can become so second of all I have already explained in the previous round how much cannabis would benefit the economy .[sic]" No, if someone wants to be a policeman, but they smoke marijuana, they will not get hired. Secondly, I want to point out the grammar once again. It is in direct defiance of my rules. Lastly, Pro refuted my brain activity photo with this: "Which is not the same as killing brain cells. [sic]" Indeed, it is not the same, but it is equally bad. It reduces brain activity, which can and will result in permanent damage. Conclusion In this debate, I have continuously refuted Pro's argument. I have shown that it is bad for health and that it can result in death. I have also shown that Pro is neither capable of providing good citations and sources, nor proper grammar and spelling. I thank Pro for debating this topic with me and I believe the results of this debate are clear to the viewers and I: Vote Con. MLA Citations "Marijuana Triggered Deaths of Two Men, Study Says." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. 14 Mar. 2014. <http://www.cbsnews.com...;.