the legalization of marijuana

Welcome to the site, Pro. To clarify, I am a SHE, not a HE :) Back to the arguments... Pro begins by saying that pot will create jobs because people will start their own hemp businesses. This is an economically unsound argument. Again, since pot would be legal, and people would presumably grow their own to save money, then they're not going to buy it from other people either in the form of marijuana or hemp products. Additionally, you'll notice that Pro agreed that law enforcement and the like would lose their jobs. Pro contends this by saying "their job would be easier." Okay? They wouldn't have a job - that's the point. Next Pro argues that people would have jobs as hemp and the like would be used as energy alternatives. The reality is that hemp is not ideal for these things. On the contrary, the increasingly popular solar power, wind power and of course hybrid options are more feasible, practical and effective. Therefore my opponent has been unable to uphold any of his points thus far or negate my own. Moving on, Pro writes that I'm wrong in noting that people would do things like go to work high. I'd like to point out that I never said anything about going to work high. What I did say was that it's a FACT that just as pot is known to make people feel silly, giggly and sleepy, that it's also known to make people lazy, lethargic, apathetic, irresponsible and unproductive. Therefore Pro not only straw manned my argument, but also provided a moot point which is irrelevant. My argument was that these negative impacts DO affect smokers, which is not a contention in favor of legalization. Pro then says something about those 18+ that I couldn't quite comprehend. I think he said that only those over 18 could legally buy it in the drug stores; however, I already said how young people would still be able to acquire it easier if it were legal, which could be considered irresponsible by law makers. Further, once again, people wouldn't have to buy it in the store -- they would grow it. Pro acknowledges that minors would grow it, therefore he concedes this argument to me. Next Pro writes, "As we all know marijuana has no side effects..." That is a completely false statement. As I said in my last round, there are significant health risks including weakening people's immune system, increasing the likelihood of mouth cancer (perhaps other kinds of cancer as well), accelerating some of the diseases it's trying to help, progressing the speed of HIV and AIDS, lead to an increase in schizophrenic patients, etc [1]. You'll notice that Pro did not combat these valid points at all, and merely stated that there are no side effects. This is blatantly wrong. Pro continues to say that there are medicinal benefits to marijuana to which I have never disagreed. Instead, I argued that there are also significant risks which could be considered to cancel out any potential benefits. Pro continues to point out that pot is beneficial because while it induces munchies, it's okay because marijuana can provide a cure for anorexia. Haha that's a ridiculous argument with no factual basis, so it should not be taken into consideration on the part of the Pro. And finally, you'll note that Pro failed to demonstrate how smoking pot would lead to world peace. As I said, just because pot makes some people lazy and tranquil doesn't mean that it would solve the world's problems or cure people's mental illness or thirst for power and greed, etc. The resolution once again has been negated. Reference: [1] http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...