All recreational drugs should be decriminalised.

Some good points, I'll now try to refute your arguments. "Of course we live in a "truly free country", yet there is freedom with responsibility or consequences from one's choices.", the freedom of responsibility and consequences of your choice are just that; your own freedom. By allowing consenting adults to make their own informed choices about what they want to put in their body is a fundamental human right, any country that wants to be free should respect that right. "Just because recreational drugs are attainable does not mean that society needs to condone it. And decriminalizing recreational drugs does give society's blessing that it"s is no big deal.", people should be properly informed about the dangers of recreational drugs, and then they should be able to make their own decision about it. If we legalised these substances, we aren't saying it is "no big deal", just like how alcohol and tobacco are legal, people know of the consequences of these substances because they have been properly informed, they can then make their own decisions as to if they want to take them or not. "Recreational drugs are NOT healthy for society. What good were our predecessors if they did not try to make it better for the future generations? Don't we want a better future for our children?", but alcohol and tobacco are healthy for society? Why is it perfectly fine to get completely wasted, to poison your lungs with smoke, but to take a bong hit or take a tab of LSD is totally taboo? This seems like a huge hypocrisy to me, unless, of course, you also believe alcohol and tobacco should be criminalised. As to your argument about a better society for future generations, I don't see how outlawing these substances will achieve that, all we are doing is creating yet another control mechanism, another black market, with all the turf disputes, money going to criminals, etc. that comes with it. Obviously, children should not be allowed to take these substances, as they are too young to make their own informed decisions, like with alcohol and tobacco. "This is a false argument, outside of being hooked on morphine/pain-killers from a serious accident, drugs are a choice. Because of knowledge of drugs and its outcome is so commonplace, it is a choice." I think you are missing the point here, my point was that when someone does take an addictive substance, and they become dependent on it, it is a health problem, that isn't an opinion, it is factual, your body can become literally dependent on these substances, and you will do near anything to get your hands on it, otherwise you will go through withdrawal. My point was that locking these people up does not help them, they need proper, professional medical care, just with any sort of health problem, these people are not criminals, they are addicts. "Recreational drugs are a crime for a reason. Drug addiction would be the inevitable outcome especially with ease of access. And recreational drugs WILL LEAD to major health problems which burden everyone therefore by banning it, society can curb it. [1]", again, back to alcohol and tobacco, why are these substances, which cause major health problems, addiction, everything that these criminalised drugs can do, totally legal? Should we ban every single thing that you can be addicted to, or will cause health problems? If that is the case, why don't we ban all high-salt food, alcohol, tobacco, aspirin, etc? People need to be allowed to make their own choices, it is not up to the government, me, you, anyone to make that choice for them, if people want to get completely drunk, let them, if people want to smoke marijuana, take a LSD hit, that is not my decision to make for them, they should be allowed to do so. "Almost every time when anything is forbidden, a black market is created. Levis jeans were forbidden in the former USSR. [2] Alcohol was prohibited and yet it was appealed with Amendment 21. Alcohol, a legal recreational drug albeit, doesn't remain in one's system as long as the illegal recreational drugs do.", this is simply not true, many illegal recreational drugs are far less damaging than alcohol, in fact here is a list of drugs deemed less harmful than alcohol that are totally illegal: [http://www.listology.com...], as you can see, LSD, marijuana, ecstasy, ketamine, speed, all drugs that have been demonised, are actually LESS harmful than alcohol, a totally legal substance! If you can't agree that all drugs should be legalised, you must at least see the insanity of keeping drugs that are LESS damaging to people illegal, but allow alcohol to be completely legal? "To endorse and decriminalize recreational drugs means that society approves of recreational drug usage." but society does approves recreational drug usage, look at alcohol and tobacco? Besides, people need to be properly informed of the dangers of these drugs, but banning them just isn't the government's responsibility. "Again, drugs are bad.", that doesn't mean people should not be allowed to choose if they want to take them or not, just like with high-salt food or alcohol. "An LSD trip can have long term psycho-emotional effects; some users cite the LSD experience as causing significant changes in their personality and life perspective." OK? "People who drink heavily are more likely to suffer from mental health problems."[1], "On average, each cigarette shortens a smoker's life by around 11 minutes"[2], I can list more, but that isn't the point. The point is that it is THEIR CHOICE if they want to take these risks or not, it is not up to me or you. "There is no 'safe' frequency of use for cocaine." Agreed, cocaine is not safe, but again, it is their choice if they want to take it or not, and I would much rather have legalised, regulated cocaine usage than some unpure garbage mixed with fillers. "I won't go into the gory details with every drug because the knowledge is out there for anyone to see: mental disorders, dental horrors, kidney failures et cetera." Again, that is their decision, and alcohol and tobacco can do the same things, often worse. "Until people develop a moral spine and not purchase things off the black market, there will always be a black market.", that made no sense... the black market exists because of an illegalisation of something, or a high tax, nothing else. "Why not spend more time on building up the things that shield against drug usage, like family ties or encourage people to have a marriage and family tax breaks?" I agree, there should be efforts to properly inform people of the dangers of these substances, but banning them is not our responsibility. "There has to be a line, my opponent states that drug users are not murders or rapists, so it's only a little bit breaking the law. If one doesn't draw the line & enforce the laws (which are not currently done) there were be no respect and lawlessness." No, I was saying the law is wrong, not that the law shouldn't be enforced. "Before what? Drugs were accessible at the dawn of the US." statistically, drugs are now cheaper and more pure than ever before. "I believe the morality of the people have changed.", clearly, but there's a difference between morality and control. A truly moral person doesn't make decisions for others, but rather informs them. "Therefore the answer is enforcement or stronger enforcement of the current laws not abolishing of the drug laws." MORE enforcement? Why would you continue a law that is clearly shown to not work, that is like pouring fuel on a fire. "It is rather silly to declare war on an inanimate object, e.g. War on Terror, because it allows grand sweeps of ambiguity by the politicians without holding them to any real accountability." Agreed. I ran out of character space but to answer your last 2 paragraphs: I agree with voting, this is a democracy. Again, it is not our choice to not allow people to use these drugs, it is theirs.