Drug Legalization

Hopefully the readers find this interesting, as both of us have put in a good amount of time to make this a resourceful debate. The story of Edith is quite sad, however there isn't any background information to help me diagnose his problem. Why did he not tell his parents? How did his parents not notice his difference in physical, mental, and emotional behavior caused by these heavy illicit drugs? How did any of his other friends, adults at school, or any other people in his life not notice his drastic change in lifestyle? I think this problem was due to more of a lack of outside help and an unhealthy environment than the actual drugs themselves. Also, part of the reason Edith might of been so addicted is because without drugs being legalized and regulated, regular drugs are being condensed and added with more potent chemicals, increasing the addictiveness and power of the drugs. This, in return, adds to the demand of the average consumer. Part of the Iron Law of Probation, examples can be seen from both the prohibition era and the War on Drugs[1]-Bootleggers and crime syndicates back in the Prohibition era gave up on regular beer in favor of more potent whisky and moonshine. -Cartels today are abandoning the regular powder cocaine substances in favor of crack pellets(crack cocaine). If Drugs were legalized by the government, the toxicity, pureness, and density of the product can be strictly regulated and managed by licensed professionals to ensure production doesn't get out of hand. Alcohol usage during ProhibitionMy opponent claims usage of alcohol significantly decreased over the course of Prohibition's existence. Although there was a steady drop during the first few years, usage quickly increased every year after the last dip in usage. [2] Production and distribution of alcohol also rapidly increased despite increased resources to fight it[2]. Prohibition also showed the exact same unintended consequences that the War on Drugs is showing[3]"Alcohol became more dangerous to consume; crime increased and became “organized”; the court and prison systems were stretched to the breaking point; and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in productivity or reduced absenteeism. Prohibition removed a significant source of tax revenue and greatly increased government spending. "ConclusionI'll be summarizing and polishing up my main arguments1) Individual Rights and Legality: My opponent never really refuted this point, other than saying the government has a responsibility to protect us from ourselves, which is false. We have inalienable rights to put whatever we want into our bodies, no matter how healthy or harmful the substance is, without government interference. He also never refuted any of my examples on how the War on Drugs directly conflicts the U. S. Constitution. The War on Drugs is a system that is in clear conflict with our basic human rights, and our U. S. Constitutional rights. 2) Violence and Drug Cartels: My opponent confused this point. He thought that when I meant 58000 have died so far in Mexico, he thought I meant by drugs. Those people have died within a short amount of time by the violence and viciousness of the Drug Cartels. Innocent people, Mexican law enforcement, and governmental bodies are systematically being murdered for being vocally against the cartels, or impeding profits. The cartels will not stop their body of work unless we legalize illicit drugs and regulate them safely, and put the profits in the hands of U. S. governmental bodies that can put them to programs that benefit society. Also, with cartels increasingly working their way into U. S. cities(see statistic in previous rounds), it's a matter of time before Mexico's frightening reality hits the very streets in which we live. 3) Inefficiency of the War on Drugs: The statistics I have provided show no correlation between increased spending on illicit drug prohibition and decreased usage. Despite over $1 trillion dollars spent trying to deter rampart illicit drug use, the amount of people using only increases. Paired with increased deaths, increased availability, and cheaper prices; the War on Drugs is dramatically adding to our national deficit without any positive results to show for it. 4) Economic Benefits & Prison Costs: Despite being the self-proclaimed "land of the free", America has the largest prison system in the world, even dwarfing the prison populations of China and Russia. The cost of housing all these prisoners, plus the cost of financing this disastrous war, is astounding. Locking up drug users, who are causing no harm to any other human being due to their actions, is wrong on an economic and moral scale. If we legalize, regulate, and tax the sale of illicit drugs, the government could not only save money from decreasing prison costs, but generate billions of dollars in revenue. Instead of that money being made by the illegal, crime riddled cartels, that money can be put to use by the government. That money can go to construction, school costs, scholarships, and prevention and rehabilitation systems. Instead of convicted drug users not being able to get jobs, college funds/scholarships, or other basic human privileges, we can help turn their lives around for the better and return them to normal lives. 5) Benefits of Legalization: My opponent ignored the failure of the Rockefeller Laws, and the extreme success of several European systems, in which large-scale prevention and rehabilitation focused measures were taken over our current draconian system of fines, prison time, and the removal of basic human rights. Thank you for debating this with me, and thank any viewer who took the time to read this. If you feel inclined too, please vote on who you think did the better job at arguing their side. Sources 1) . http://sites.bergen.org...2) . http://object.cato.org...3) . http://www.cato.org...