The legalization of Marijuana is likely to have a more favorable impact than current policy

I present the following rebuttals (Mangani's points in allcaps): "BETTER" (more) REGULATION -This is bad. Unregulated is working fine. We don't need regulation. It would be frivolous. "IMPROVEMENT" OF QUALITY -This is probably not true. When things become mass produced, they lose that special touch. Home grown gets my vote. It's your burden now to prove why mass production would yield "improved" quality. REDUCTION IN STREET PRICES -This is bad for dealers. Bad for dealers means people will be less willing to sell their own, home-grown weed. So all the buyers can buy after this is some lame factory made weed. Bad for buyers, bad for sellers, bad overall. ALIENATE STREET DEALERS -Explain how this is good. If I was supporting something, I wouldn't use "makes people lose their jobs" as a point. "BETTER" CONTROL OF ACCESS TO MINORS -Minors have a good level of access as is. It is your burden to prove that minors need less access to weed. Are you a bad enough dude to support that? STIFFER PUNISHMENTS TO THOSE WHO CONTRIBUTE TO MINORS' USAGE -As above, I contend that there is nothing wrong with minors using weed. LAW ENFORCEMENT COULD CONCENTRATE ON OTHER THINGS -Law enforcement currently focuses on drugs only because drugs often precede other illegal activity. If you're looking for a fire, you might as well move towards that smoke in the distance. Cops would not shift their focus, and if they did, they would be less effective. SAFER ENVIRONMENTS FOR USERS -That would take all the fun out of using it. Thus, it would become less useful as a recreational drug. As a prescription drug used for pharmaceutical use, most states already allow it to be used. Regardless, that is not the type of legalization we're talking about, and you know it. MORE SUCCESSFUL HEMP INDUSTRY -A more successful hemp industry means less success for other industries. Thus, this is not just a positive point. MORE TAXES -Tax from recreational users would probably provide less income than what is made by courts as of now. Tax from industrial production would increase just as much because of Marijuana as it would lower for Marijuana's competitors. Tax from medicinal use would be very low, since it is rarely required. Also, it is already legal medicinally many places, so this is not new tax your proposition brings to the table. MORE RESEARCH -It would not be more researched. It can already be easily researched, and there are groups of scientists who do studies on its medicinal benefits. Thus, your proposition does not bring this ability to the table, it already has a seat right next to medicinal use. LESS SUCCESS FOR COMPETITIVE DRUGS -Marijuana can already be used medically in many places. Not only that, but even if it did deal some major blow to other companies, this is not good. These "pharmaceutical monopolies," as you call them, control the market for an array of drugs (I assume, based on your wording). This means that if they get hurt by Marijuana, the entire market for other drugs will suffer. to make up for the profit, they will have to increase the price of the other drugs, something they can do if they are monopolies. Thus, not an overall positive effect here. LOWER PHARMACEUTICAL COST OF MARIJUANA -Marijuana is already legal as medicine in many states. Not only that, but so few people have to use it medically that it would be insignificant. Insurance usually pays for the majority of a person's medical expenses anyway. MORE FREE JAIL CELLS -So we'd have a bunch of free space in jails? This doesn't sound like that great of a thing. Not only that, but people who get caught by the cops for smoking Marijuana tend to be idiots. Thus, law abiding citizens get to enjoy a more idiot-free life, which is priceless. 4 rounds, so I'll leave it at that.