Recreational Marijuana Legalization

Thanks Con, True, if someone wants to change, they must present evidence, which the government has done in the past to prompt the criminalization of marijuana. My evidence for desiring that change is my views on personal freedom. Legalization is the only sensible option (in my opinion) because I view personal freedom as an unalienable human right, as do many others[1]. In this source, it is explained that each person has the right to liberty, freedom of thought, and freedom of expression. Unlike things such as coca plants and opium plants (heroin and cocaine), marijuana is much safer for the individual and society (I've cited sources for this in previous entries). Therefore, the right to grow and/or use this plant falls under the same heading of "personal expression" that would allow one to grow his/her own organic garden, or other such things. Drug education is very well known by the public and drug users, the problem is that they (unfortunately) choose to ignore the risks when knowledge is possessed [2]. A very small amount of people claim dependance on cannabis [3], and users report no symptoms of physical addiction (I can also attest to this based on personal experience). Unlike harder drugs, which would be much more harmful if deemed "acceptable", marijuana would not cause the same harms. My opponent seems to ignore the healthy alternatives to smoking, and while this would not apply for every single user, public knowledge of these methods would drastically reduce potential hospitalization. Aside from this, Con disregards the current cost of prohibition that would disappear if it were legal [4]. "Fraud is a non-violent crime," however, it hurts one or more individuals involved. Cannabis use only (potentially) harms the individual, and/or the user's lives or the lives around him/her if the user has no sense of personal responsibility. This is why the use of any recreational drug is unacceptable when it interferes with one's responsibilities to him/herself or others, but with a drug that isn't physically addictive (and only slightly mentally addictive), this outcome lies entirely on the user (again referring to personal freedom/responsibility). The punishment is extremely relevant to the legal status. Would anyone prescribe the death penalty for shoplifting? This would be outrageously unfair. I am lenient toward parts of the world that have decriminalized possession of small amounts, but it is still abhorrent for those who aren't in those parts of the world to suffer severe punishment for a harmless and victimless "crime". I concede to my opponent's facts about the dangers of smoking, however, this does not change my position on the relative harm of this drug being directly related to the ethics of its criminalization. My opponent's sources are correct about the state of the Amsterdam scenario, but what many people (including my opponent) fail to realize is that, if legal, there would be a much reduced law enforcement cost, and cannabis sales would be completely taxable by that country's government. As I've said before, proper drug education is readily available to my knowledge (at least in my country), as it should be everywhere. The decision to use any substance (legal or illegal) still lies solely upon the user. In places such as Amsterdam the punishment is still severe for hard drugs use/sale [5], deterring potential users. It is also my view that those who will choose move on to harder drugs are not affected by the legality or illegality of a certain, different substance. Con presents a very valid point as far as legality of other substances goes. I am simply trying to point out that it is ironic that a government would sell such dangerous substances while condemning the use of a much less dangerous substance. My thoughts on personal freedom lead me to believe that these substances are currently ingrained in society, and as a result, legal and should stay that way (albeit, with stricter limitations), including cannabis. "...society's opinion is just as subjective as any individual member..." Ironically (in my country's form of government), it is indirectly the subjective view of society that decides the state of the nation's laws. While not always entirely correct, it is the responsibility of each voter to become educated on the issues. Anyone who is properly educated on drug facts and/or has had experience with them will tell you that heroin and other hard drugs are much less acceptable for many reasons (i.e. the popular quote, "have you ever sucked d**k for weed?"). My arguments for ending marijuana prohibition are at times similar to arguments against alcohol prohibition. It is my view that the prohibition of these substances does much more harm than legalization would. If an individual accepts recreational alcohol use in any way, he/she has no basis for the continuation of cannabis prohibition. Good luck in your last response, Con. [1] http://www.abouthumanrights.co.uk... [2] http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org... [3] http://www.drugpolicy.org... [4] http://www.scribd.com... [5] http://www.ehow.com...