Should marijuana be legalized.

Now onto the debate. My oppponent has cited a source for his statistics of marijuana use decreasing, yet on that same website I find numbers that contradict his. "The use of illicit drugs among Americans increased between 2008 and 2010 according to a national survey conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) shows that 22.6 million Americans 12 or older (8.9-percent of the population) were current illicit drug users. The rate of use in 2010 was similar to the rate in 2009 (8.7-percent), but remained above the 2008 rate (8- percent). " This clearly discredits his statement, but I really didn't need discredit it since it has absolutely no relevance. The topic of this debate is not whether or not marijuana use is decreasing, it is the negatives and positives of marijuana itself and I can only count this as a red herring. Now my opponent holds the contention that marijuana is abused and that some people are depndent on it. I ask him for a definition for the word abuse in the context he has used it and how the use of marijuana follows this definition. I aslo ask that he tell me what it is these people are dependent upon marijuana for, certainly not to feed an addiction right? Since marijuana has yet to show any addictive qualities, besides those that can be attributed to anything which gives a pleasant feeling. As to a possible increase in marijuna usage after legalisation, I would like statistical evidence of this using countries that have legalized marijuana (IE: Netherlands, etc. .. ). I would also like reasoning as to why this is bad. You cannot compare gambling to marijuana in the context you are, for instance does the government generally promote tobacco and alcohol use because they recieve tax from it? Oh wait, no they banned advertising and public, for tobacco the definition of public is not quite as broad, use of both. Isn't that weird? You propose to compare the health risks of smoking and tobacco to the health risks of marijuana? I ask that you show me information showing similar levels of health risk. I would also ask for reasoning as to why legislation cannot be put in place to rescind health care in regards to health problems related to things like marijuana. But simply put the status of legal being bestowed upon tobacco and alcohol shows a seriously large amount of hypocrisy in any legal system. Now you are of course correct in that any new marijuna users would not necesarrily be adults, but let me ask you something: Who is more likely to sell marijuana to someone under the age of 18 a person already breaking the law by selling an illicit substance, or a shopkeeper who generally runs his buisness according to the law and is always under the scrutiniy of said law via inspections and required permits? Trust me, as a pot smoker I know how much easier it is to get pot when your under 18 then alcohol or cigaretts because the guys selling it don't usually care how old you are. Also, you make this statement "The costs of legalizing marijuana would not only be financial. " I'd like to know exactly what financial costs you forsee in the legalisation of marijuana, considering estimates of the tax dollars that could be gained from this are in the high billions. I'd also like to know what health risks, physical and mental as you mention, exist. To my knowledge none exist beyond inhalation of carcinogens most of which are created in the chemical reaction of combustion. These effect can easily be avoided by vapourising or ingesting rather then smoking. Now, you've thrown out some statistics for what you claim is accidents caused by marijuana, you also claim that legalisation will increase these amounts. First off I'd like to point out the possibility of causation correlation fallacy, and that these statistics mean nothing. Until it is conclusivly shown that marijuna effects motor skills and the such I will continue to claim those results as fallacious. Secondly I'd like to see statistics from a country with pot legalized that correlates with your claim of an increase in such incidents. "Many people who want to legalize marijuana are passionate about their perception of the alleged failures of policies aimed at reducing marijuana use but those legalization proponents seldom—if ever—describe their own plan for taxing and regulating marijuana as a legal drug. There is a reason for this imbalance; they cannot come up with a credible plan for legalization that could deliver on their exaggerated claims for this new policy. " You do realise that the implications of this are that the netherlands does not have a similar policy, when they do have exactly that. This also has absolutely nothing to do with my contention and is just another red herring. "Since legalization of marijuana for medical or general use would increase marijuana use rather than reduce it and would lead to increased rates of addiction to marijuana among youth and adults" Really, are you sure about that? Because the rate of teens who have tried marijuana in the netherlands is 21%, and the rate in the U. S is more then double that at 45%. And the rate of adults who use it are of similar standings [] Im really disappointed in the response you have given since it appears to not be an actual response to me but merely a cut and pasted essay which talks about a fair few things which are completely irrelevant. I ask that in any future debates we might have that you do not give me some cookie cutter respone that you think is a beat-em all argument. Sources: . http://www.samhsa.gov... . http://www.drugwarfacts.org... . http://www.drugwarfacts.org... . http://norml.org...