Marijuana should be legalized

Hi! Frankly, I"m excited to be debating this topic, as it is definitely an important a sensitive issue. I agree with your definition of the plant that"s planted, but I would like to draw an important distinction. We"re debating if marijuana should be legalized, which is not the same thing as whether marijuana should be decriminalized. Legalize means to make something licit, whereas decriminalize means to remove criminal penalties from it. In other words, if marijuana were decriminalized, people would be fined (and only fined lesser sums) instead of jailed if caught using it. If it were entirely legal, there would be no penalty whatsoever. I think that marijuana should be decriminalized, but should remain illegal, and I"ll use this premise to argue the con. With this in mind, I completely agree that marijuana should not be a schedule one, two, etc. drug. It"s not even close to being on par with heroin or other hard drugs. Decriminalizing it would bring the punishment more in line with the danger actually created by the drug. However, as you acknowledge, marijuana is still addictive and, as I shall endeavor to prove, can pose a threat. I have four core arguments, which I will go through now. Contention One: Legalizing marijuana makes it appear as less of a threat, and, therefore, actually promotes risky behavior. CNBC reported in 2010: "In the discussion of legalizing marijuana, a useful analogy can be made to gambling. MacCoun & Reuter (2001) conclude that making the government a beneficiary of legal gambling has encouraged the government to promote gambling, overlooking it as a problem behavior. They point out that "the moral debasement of state government is a phenomenon that only a few academics and preachers bemoan."" Marijuana is already the most abused, illicit drug in the world; why should we promote further irresponsible consumption of it by making it legal. CNBC notes, "Legalized gambling has not reduced illegal gambling in the United States; rather, it has increased it. This is particularly evident in sports gambling, most of which is illegal. Legal gambling is taxed and regulated and illegal gambling is not. Legal gambling sets the stage for illegal gambling just the way legal marijuana would set the stage for illegal marijuana trafficking. The gambling precedent suggests strongly that illegal drug suppliers would thrive by selling more potent marijuana products outside of the legal channels that would be taxed and otherwise restricted. If marijuana were legalized, the only way to eliminate its illegal trade, which is modest in comparison to that of cocaine, would be to sell marijuana untaxed and unregulated to any willing buyer. If the U.S. were to legalize marijuana, the number of marijuana users would increase. Today there are 15.2 million current marijuana users in comparison to 129 million alcohol users and 70.9 million tobacco users. Though the number of marijuana users might not quickly climb to the current numbers for alcohol and tobacco, if marijuana was legalized, the increase in users would be both large and rapid with subsequent increases in addiction." It seems then, that the pro side would actually escalate the problem. Contention Two: Marijuana poses a grave risk on the road. CNBC argues that: "Drug-impaired driving will also increase if marijuana is legalized. Marijuana is already a significant causal factor in highway crashes, injuries and deaths. In a recent national roadside survey of weekend nighttime drivers, 8.6 percent tested positive for marijuana or its metabolites, nearly four times the percentage of drivers with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 g/dL (2.2 percent). In another study of seriously injured drivers admitted to a Level-1 shock trauma center, more than a quarter of all drivers (26.9 percent) tested positive for marijuana. In a study of fatally injured drivers in Washington State, 12.7 percent tested positive for marijuana. These studies demonstrate the high prevalence of drugged driving as a result of marijuana use." So, when the pro mentions how alcohol is a bigger problem than marijuana, that is because marijuana is very tightly regulated, whereas that is less true with alcohol. Once marijuana is legalized, marijuana will become the bigger issue. Contention Three: Marijuana is medically harmful. As reported in the Huffington Post in 2012: "Many studies show serious problems, for example, with schizoid psychosis while smoking. " This is further evidenced by a study conduct by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which found mice, especially younger mice, at risk of cortical malformations and neurological problems after smoking even small amounts of pot. The report goes on to note that "marijuana can act as a cancer-causing carcinogen and damaging DNA for pot smoke contains higher levels of certain toxins than tobacco, which is why pot smokers face rapid lung destruction, with the impact on lungs from one joint equaling up to five cigarettes. Pot also opens the door for the virus that causes Kaposi's Sarcoma. And for pregnant moms, it can harm their unborn child by impairing growth and by causing long-lasting neurobehavioural problems. For habitual use is strongly associated with car crash injuries and smoking marijuana doubles the risk of fatal accidents." This seems to, at the very least, counterbalance the claims about marijuana"s curative properties. Contention Four: There is little to no financial benefit in legalizing marijuana. CNBC notes, "The costs of legalizing marijuana would not only be financial. New marijuana users would not be limited to adults if marijuana were legalized, just as regulations on alcohol and tobacco do not prevent use by youth. Rapidly accumulating new research shows that marijuana use is associated with increases in a range of serious mental and physical problems. Lack of public understanding on this relationship is undermining prevention efforts and adversely affecting the nation"s youth and their families. This is shaping up to be a great debate. I look forward to your responses.