This house would legalize the use of marijuana

Thanks Pro.Because I’ve unfortunately caused a round to be missed, I’ll just start summarizing the major points in the debate.IS TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL LEGAL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT HARMFUL?Throughout his arguments, my opponent seems to imply that Tobacco and Alcohol are legal because the government does not deem it harmful enough to be considered an offence, and this is the reason why these products are legal. However, no evidence has been presented in favour of this. I would argue that the reason why the government allows tobacco and alcohol to be legal is instead because the substances are too ingrained in our history to be pragmatically outlawed (as evidenced by the way the Tobacco industry spends millions of dollars battling against anti smoking campaigns). Unless my opponent proves otherwise, the health effects of tobacco and alcohol should not be used as a standard for what should be made legal.I would argue that it is reasonable to ban cannabis because it is harmful and not a deep part of our history, therefore, laws made against the substance is enforceable (as evidenced by declining usage rates in countries that have implemented anti-marijuana policies successfully). This is why marijuana is illegal, and alcohol and tobacco are not - it's not a question of exactly how harmful marijuana is, as my opponent seems to suggest.WOULD WE BE SAVING MONEY BY LEGALIZING MARIJUANA?Ironically, I did not misinterpret my opponent's argument, rather, he misinterpreted my rebuttal. My opponent claims that the drug market will be halved after the legalization of marijuana simply because marijuana constitutes 50% of the total illegal drug market. This is an overly simplified and short sighted assumption. The point I was trying to make is that it is unrealistic and my opponent has given us no good reason to believe that marijuana dealers and pushers would simply stop participating in illegal trading after cannabis is legalized. As I have stated before, 90% of the people involved in the drug trade are not actually involved in cultivating marijuana. Because cultivators now don’t need pushers because weed is legal, the remaining 90% of criminals involved in the marijuana trade now are left unemployed, and I would argue that it is more realistic to assume that these people will simply make up for the lost income by committing other crimes or pushing other drugs than to assume that they will, as my opponent suggests, simply get educated and become contributing members of society. My opponent says that this is not logical but does not substantiate his claim with a source. Therefore, I’ll leave it up to the voters to decide which situation is more realistic.Additionally, my opponent has not addressed the fact that over 50% of the illegal drug market will still exist under my opponents laws because 50% of the drug market is under 18. Therefore, money saved on enforcing marijuana the marijuana ban will have to be diverted into enforcing the increasing market for other illegal drugs.My opponent also did not research Alaska's history very thoroughly. My opponents statistics for crime rates and drug usage for marijuana deal will rates post year 2000, and what he fails to realize is that Alaska recriminalized marijuana after it's disastrous attempt to legalize it. Therefore, the declining crime and usage rates that my opponent talks about occured after marijuana was made illegal. My opponent also claims that I did not show why increased marijuana usage rates are bad. This is false, because I have talked about the permanent brain damage marijuana causes in minors (1 in 10 develop schizophrenia) [1], the decreased work productivity marijuana causes and increased bootlegging. My opponent does not refute any of these arguments.IN CONCLUSIONI feel like I offer a very logical/straightforward argument –- Marijuana is harmful, especially for minors (backed by studies and statistics)- Legalizing marijuana will result in increased usage, especially increased teen usage (conceded by my opponent)- Legalizing marijuana means that people involved in the marijuana trade will probably be forced to deal other drugs- Legalizing marijuana also results in bootlegging and decreased work efficiency (also conceded by my opponent)- The increased teen usage results in mental impairment and decreased intelligence and means that more people will become reliant on our countries public healthcare, further offsetting any money gained through legalization.Because legalizing marijuana will not provide returns and results in a generation of sick, mentally impaired, and unproductive workers, the government is justified in keeping the substance illegal.I thank Pro for the engaging debate. I hope we can do this again some time due to all the forfeitures.SOURCEShttp://en.wikipedia.org...(drug)#Adolescent_brain_development