LSD Legalization

I will use this round solely for arguments. ClarificationsLSD refers to Lysergic acid diethylamide: a semi-synthetic illicit organic compound C20H25N3O derived from ergot that induces extreme sensory distortions, altered perceptions of reality, and intense emotional states that may also produce delusions or paranoia, and that may sometimes cause panic reactions in response to the effects experienced [1]. The resolution is clear. Pro is responsible for upholding the burden to show why LSD should be legalized for recreational use in the U. S. Whereas I, in turn, must uphold my burden of showing why LSD should not be legalized in the U. S. Every reasonable judge should view this as a split BOP due to this being a normative debate. ArgumentsI. Harm to SelfA. Short-term Harm to SelfLSD impairs judgment, this is indisputable. By way of its sensory distortions, and altered states of reality, LSD users become seriously impaired, with the effects lasting up to 12 hrs at a time. Due to the impairment of judgement, we unfortunately see many cases of self-harm when looking at the effects and known cases of LSD users. This is empirically evidenced by the numerous reports of deaths and other tragedies that could have been easily avoided had the drug not been taken (see: [2],[3],[4]). There are additional risks and harms that stem from the immediate usage of LSD. While under the influence, users experience emotional instability, a loss of sense of reality and a loss of the ability to tell what is real or not. In some cases, this can cause intense fear, a sensation of going insane, or even feeling like they are dying. Negative experiences such as these are what LSD users call a "bad trip" and it's one of the most common harms from LSD and is the most commonly discussed harm amongst LSD users when warning first-time trippers. A bad trip can have effects that last several days after the initial hallucinations pass [5],[6]. B. Long-term Harm to SelfWhile LSD is not considered to be physically addictive, a user can develop a tolerance for the drug and become psychologically addicted. [7] In fact, the DEA has developed three reasons as to why LSD users may find repeated abuse desirable and dangerous:1) The long duration of the drug's effects means the user will not have to purchase the drug on a rapidly recurring basis.2) Tolerance develops so quickly that repeated ingestion is useless so the dosages have to become more potent.3) The inconsistent effects and potential adverse reactions lead to erratic use of LSD. This can be seen as exciting and users will not become bored. In addition to this, and according to LSDAbusehelp. com, an online LSD support center: "The psychedelic effects of LSD produce two mind altering conditions that can last for years after just one use of the drug. The first condition is known as hallucinogen persisting perception disorder (HPPD). This disorder produces repeated long-term flashback episodes to prior events. These flashbacks involve visual disturbances such as seeing flashing lights or false images and objects. HPPD can occur in users for years even after discontinued use of LSD. " [8] "The second condition that can be caused by LSD is psychosis. Psychosis triggers extreme behavioral changes or violent mood swings in a user. LSD eliminates rationality, and users are no longer able to think, reason or communicate with others. Psychosis is brought on by LSD and causes the user to display strong behavioral changes such as unpredictable mood swings, paranoia and violent behavior. A user can still be plagued with psychosis long after they stop taking LSD. If LSD abuse continues, a person can develop long-lasting psychosis which involves mental illness including schizophrenia and severe depression. " [8] II. Harm to Others; direct and indirect Despite the fact that many mechanisms of how these hallucinogenic drugs work are not clearly understood, it is believed that they work by impairing neurotransmitter reception as well as binding the receptor sites [9]. Due to the fact that it creates sensory distortions, users generally do not make good decisions and unfortunately put the lives of others at risk (see: [10],[11],[12]). With flashbacks being a proven long-term impact from LSD use, one can only imagine the harm that could arise should someone get behind the wheel of a vehicle and suddenly suffer a flashback while driving. Unfortunately there are no ways to prevent these effects from occurring randomly, so under Pro's plan we'd be legalizing a drug that has unpreventable negative impacts. The most responsible thing to do would be to keep LSD illegal for recreational use, as it's current status seems to be the only effective measure we have in negating the potential harms that already arise. As it stands, there are no realistic means in which to prevent the harm to others by LSD users should it be legalized. As it is now, we have checks (laws) in place to both punish and dissuade LSD users, both of which serve to prevent potential harm to others. III. There is no legal or moral obligation to legalize LSDThe key term "should", according to Oxford Dictionary, indicates either a moral or legal obligation. I'd like to explore this and show that there is no moral or legal obligation to legalize LSD for rec. use. In the United States today, LSD is a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This means that the federal government believes LSD to have high abuse potential, a lack of accepted safe use when taken under medical supervision, and no current medical use. [13] In order to repeal or amend a law we would need 2/3 of the vote in the house and senate. However, there is currently no support, whatsoever, in legalizing LSD or having current LSD laws repealed. In fact, according to the most recent drug legalization polls, LSD has 8% support [14]. Since Pro introduced a utilitarian framework, it's safe to assume that majority rules is a value we both hold highly. We, as a whole, had the opportunity to not make LSD illegal in the first place, yet we allowed the law to be passed. To this day, the status of LSD remaining as an illegal substance is supported by 83% of our population. [14]Thus, it is clear that there is no obligation for us to legalize LSD, since the majority does not support nor desire LSD to be legalized. In closing, I have showed the harms associated with LSD use, both short-term and long-term, as well as the direct and indirect harms that can be caused by users in regards to others. In addition to this, I've shown that there is no moral or legal obligation to legalize LSD based on current polls and lack of support by our society as a whole. I will withhold my rebuttals to Pro's Harm Principle points until the next round due to space constraints. Thank you. Sources[1] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] . http://www.usatoday.com...[3] . http://kdvr.com...[4] . https://www.erowid.org...[5] . http://www.narconon.org...[6] . http://www.cesar.umd.edu...[7] . http://www.dependency.net...[8] . http://www.lsdabusehelp.com...[9] . http://www.drugabuse.gov...[10] . http://www.nbc-2.com...[11] . http://www.sfgate.com...[12] . http://www.pantagraph.com...[13] . http://science.howstuffworks.com...[14] . http://www.huffingtonpost.com...