Marijuana is not addictive or harmful.

righty: "Does it make a difference. If he smokes regularly, it will make him "feel good". It makes him "feel good" because it's like a cigarette, it will lower your stress, but it couldn't do any worse for your body. Also, it makes your energy level really low, so while they're high, they probably won't do anything." I'm a little confused about what you're trying to say. You say if he smokes it regularly it will make him feel good--I think that is an argument for my side. Then you say it makes him feel good because it's like a cigarette, it lowers stress. So you're saying that the only reason marijuana makes someone feel good is because it lowers stress? That is a totally false statement. I've smoked before and it is nothing like they teach you in health class. It's not like you can't understand whats going on and all you feel is "low stress" and you just want to curl up in a corner and do nothing with your life. It's NOTHING like that. The effects aren't even that dramatic. And no, it DOESN'T make your energy really low. I personally have ran 12 miles having smoked marijuana beforehand. I'm not even kidding--TWELVE MILES! Can you even do that when you're not high? And you're telling me that if I am high, I "probably won't do anything"? righty: "Your second argument is irrelevant, because you say people are dependent on it (that helps me), because it's illegal." I don't think you are following the logic of my argument. Instead of just skimming through the words, I think you should take some time to actually understand what I am saying. I assume you are referring to this statement I made in the second round: "Well, yes if people DID become dependent on it, they would smoke it continuously. But smoking it continuously does not consequently mean that they are dependent on it." Like I said (for some reason I feel like I'm repeating myself), just because you smoke weed daily, DOES NOT mean that you are dependent on it. Just because someone gets on the computer daily, are they dependent on it? No, they simply like getting on the computer on a regular basis. And I never said that "people are dependent on it, because it's illegal" which is what you claim I said. Again, if you would just READ the words that I write, you might actually understand what I am trying to say. That argument was a little off topic though, so I won't restate it here. (Though I do implore you to use some hypothetical thought and read that passage again.) righty: "Why shouldn't we let a person that I don't know smoke 1 time? Because it's illegal. I don't see how that isn't that clear. Lets compare it to killing someone (by smoking, your killing yourself). You kill someone that was homeless, no one knew about, nor cared about. Should that person be left off easy, because no one knew him? A murder is a murder. Smoking is smoking, there is no good way, because it is all illegal." You have far too much faith in your government my friend. You unconditionally support your government's laws. Even if the laws are based on falsifications and ignorance. At one point in our nation's history, not too long ago, it was completely LEGAL for a white person to OWN someone else with different skin color. Clearly our government has not always had it right, and clearly they never will. Just because something is ILLEGAL doesn't mean that it is inherently bad. If the government told you that you couldn't eat clam chowder on Tuesdays because it's bad for you, would you not eat clam chowder on Tuesdays, simply because Uncle Sam said so? No, because hopefully you know that there is nothing inherently wrong with eating clam chowder on ANY day of the week. I assume by your logic you find yourself completely justified in getting wasted on liquor and then smoking a pack of cigarettes because it's "legal" to do so. And your whole hobo-murder analogy does not apply here. (I concede that my clam chowder analogy does have some wholes, but none that can't be filled in.) Smoking marijuana is VICTIMLESS. You are not killing anyone else when you smoke. You're not even killing yourself. Your knowledge of drugs is very perverted (And I can't say I blame you because that's what teach you in health). You make it sound like every cannabis hit you take you are lopping years off your life. That is not the true! No one has EVER died from smoking marijuana!!!! EVER!!!!!!! Please find me a study that cites marijuana as a factor in death!!!! Please!!!!! Killing someone else is inherently wrong--applying flame to a naturally growing plant is not inherently wrong. You only think it's wrong because the government say it is. And don't give the whole "drugs are not a victimless crime"--that's bull. Smoking marijuana is victimless. And suppose that it does have some minor negative side-effects. It is the CHOICE of the person who is consuming it to determine whether those negative side-effects are enough to keep them from doing it. Every time the government tells someone they can't do something, they are infringing on their liberty. Some things are so horrible (rape, murder, etc.) that everyone agrees should not be allowed. But smoking comes no where close to those things. Who are you to tell someone that they can't do something to their own bodies? That's like if the government outlawed tattoos because it hurts to get one. It isn't their right to tell me how much pain I can handle--if I want to tolerate the negatives of getting a tattoo, and no one else has to suffer, then it should be MY choice--not the government's. righty: "And "just one" is like saying I could quit anytime, but then when you try to go quit, you can't." Wow. I really do feel bad for you because you are being fed lies wherever you learn this stuff. You are ignorant because the government wants you to be ignorant. They say stuff like, "Cocaine is so addicting, no one can do it just once." Cocaine is considered one of the most addicting drugs, and yet I read in my textbook the other day that only 16% of REGULAR USERS over the course of TEN years, displayed signs of actually being "addicted". If only 16% of ten-year-cocaine-users are actually addicted, that means that the other 84% could stop whenever they wanted to. And that is one of the most addicted substances around. Marijuana has not even close to addictive. You are only proving your limited knowledge on the subject when you say things like that. "Do you know EXACTLY how it makes you feel?- Yes, we've learned about it for the last 3 years. Also, we had 3 presentations done by cops who tell us what the effects are." Oh ok. So because you've obviously done your own research and gotten your information from unbiased sources with no special interests, I guess you know everything there is to know about drugs. "Do you think the government has smoked marijuana?- That is a false statement. Who is the government." That wasn't even a statement--it was a question. Hopefully you won't avoid my question this time. Do you think that the people who do studies for the government have ever actually smoked marijuana? The correct answer is no. Some people say that being high is completely indescribable by words. There are no combinations of letters and punctuation that can explain to you how it feels to be high. So unless you have smoked it, and apparently you haven't, then don't claim to know how it feels. And don't cite sources who don't even know how it feels. "But when you smoke it, you get high and it effects your brain, nervous system, etc. So, you really don't know how it makes you feel." Yes that is what being high is--having it affect your brain, nervous system, etc. You can still FEEL and THINK. In the end, your argument is that marijuana is bad because your health teacher said so. I have attacked your source as unreliable, and you haven't defended it.