Soft Drugs and Prostitution should be legalized.

First off my examples about McDonalds are not invalid, the examples I mentioned above are good examples because they are things that can kill, are known to kill when taken in excess or improperly, but people still eat McDonalds and drive recklessly. A victim is, "One who is harmed or killed by another" If drug users that OD are victims, then so are people who have heart attacks from eating bad, or people with cancer from smoking, or liver disease from drinking. We don't refer t these people as victims, why do we refer to users of drugs as victims? Rebuttal: "In 1999, DAWN data reported by medical examiners show that out of 664 marijuana-related deaths, there were 187 deaths where marijuana was the only drug reported." If you had read the full report you would see this quote "… total deaths involving only marijuana, 35 were suicides, 53 were accidental/unexpected (not overdose), and 69 fell into the all other category." The report specifically indicates that the term "death" is used in relation to not only direct causes but also contributing causes. So as you can see, marijuana never "directly" caused a death. Source: http://www.drugwatch.org... It was later shown in another study that "Animal tests have revealed that extremely high doses of cannabinoids are needed to have lethal effect. This has led scientists to conclude that the ratio of the amount of cannabinoids necessary to get a person intoxicated relative to the amount necessary to kill them is 1 to 40,000. In other words, to overdose, you would have to consume 40,000 times as much marijuana as you needed to get stoned. In contrast, the ratio for alcohol varies between 1 to 4 and 1 to 10. It is easy to see how upwards of 5000 people die from alcohol overdoses every year and no one EVER dies of marijuana overdoses." Source: http://www.drugtext.org... "Marijuana use is frequently mentioned in hospital emergency room drug overdose visits." Did you know they send you to a hospital emergency room if you are a minor who consumed alcohol, even non-lethal amounts? The same for all people found intoxicated from marijuana, they are sent to the emergency room as a precaution, not because they are dying. Second, you do not specify that these visits are directly a result from the actual "use" of the drug or drugs in question. "We've tried working with [marijuana smoke], and it's so toxic, you just get it near the immune system and it [the immune system] dies." "Like the studies claiming to show damage to the reproductive system, this myth is based on studies where animals were given extremely high-in many cases, near-lethal-doses of cannabinoids. These results have never been duplicated in human beings. Interestingly, two studies done in 1978 and one done in 1988 showed that hashish and marijuana may have actually stimulated the immune system in the people studied." Source: http://www.drugtext.org... "Marijuana users have been shown to have an increase in neurotic and psychopathic behavior" "The most celebrated study that claims to show brain damage is the rhesus monkey study of Dr. Robert Heath, done in the late 1970s. This study was reviewed by a distinguished panel of scientists sponsored by the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences. Their results were published under the title, Marijuana and Health in 1982. Heath's work was sharply criticized for its insufficient sample size (only four monkeys), its failure to control experimental bias, and the misidentification of normal monkey brain structure as "damaged". Actual studies of human populations of marijuana users have shown no evidence of brain damage. For example, two studies from 1977, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) showed no evidence of brain damage in heavy users of marijuana. That same year, the American Medical Association (AMA) officially came out in favor of decriminalizing marijuana. That's not the sort of thing you'd expect if the AMA thought marijuana damaged the brain." Source: http://www.drugtext.org... "Women who smoke marijuana produce children who are 11 times as susceptible to leukemia than non-drug users." Yeah, during PREGNANCY. According to you – "California decriminalized marijuana in 1976, and, within the first six months, arrests for driving under the influence of drugs rose 46 percent for adults and 71.4 percent for juveniles.[33] Decriminalizing marijuana in Alaska and Oregon in the 1970s resulted in the doubling of use.[34] Patrick Murphy, a court-appointed lawyer for 31,000 abused and neglected children in Chicago, says that more than 80 percent of the cases of physical and sexual abuse of children now involve drugs. There is no evidence that legalizing drugs will reduce these crimes, and there is evidence that suggests it would worsen the problem." Well in Amsterdam- usage for legalized drugs was cut in half. The "drug use" in child abuse cases overwhelmingly involve alcohol, not heroine or cocaine and the like. For DUI "However, a closer examination of the victims revealed that around 85% of the people intoxicated on marijuana WERE ALSO INTOXICATED ON ALCOHOL. For people only intoxicated on marijuana, the rate was much lower than for alcohol alone. This finding has been supported by other research using completely different methods. For example, an economic analysis of the effects of decriminalization on marijuana usage found that states that had reduced penalties for marijuana possession experienced a rise in marijuana use and a decline in alcohol use with the result that fatal highway accidents decreased. This would suggest that, far from causing "carnage", legal marijuana might actually save lives." As mentioned before, profit is to be made from legalizing drugs. More money as been spent on the drug war just last year than the figures you give on lost productivity, also hospitalization will decrease because with legalization comes regulation. If someone is going to get intoxicated, they have a choice about what they would be intoxicated on. Its not like there are people out their who only smoke pot or only drink alcohol and drive. They will take whatever they have access to, legal or illegal. Crime rate would also decrease from legalization. It is unclear in any data but I can say personally that I work with a lawyer and although I can't give to many specifics, the vast majority of the people that come in for property crime, such as theft or shop lifting, were stealing to pay for drugs. The high cost of drugs would be cut if they became legal because the black market inflates everything. Sources: http://www.drugtext.org... You claim that prostitutes are exposed to violence, STDs, and make little money because of pimps. Legalization again means regulation – there will be no more pimp, pimps profit from the illegality. Places were you can "purchase" the services can require the use of condoms and screen all employees. A safe place in the brothel with security can also minimize risk of violence. Most of the problems with prostitution are directly related to its illegality, if it is legal then most of these problems will be fixed. Moreover, this is still a victimless crime, you have cited cases when prostitutes are victimized by violence, pimps, and other people not involved (in the bedroom anyway) with the actual prostitution. Most times these people conduct their business safely and few have problems. None of the problems you mentioned above occur at the Moonlite Bunny Ranch in Nevada were prostitution is legal. The girls are safe, the customers are happy, and everybody gets paid. HBO did a special documentary with interviews with the girls, and none of them complained about their job and many say they have "no regrets." I am almost out of room so I have to cut it short, your turn.