Recreational Marijuana Legalization

Hey, welcome! I'm going to run a very simple argument today. The burden of proof is clearly on my opponent to show one good reason why cannabis use is acceptable. I claim that my opponent cannot meet that burden. In other words, there is no good reason to legalize it, so let's just stick with the status quo. So let's critically examine what my erudite opponent has written already: 1) "It has still not been proven that one single death in history has been caused by the direct or indirect effects of smoking this herb" It has also not been proven that smoking tobacco is related to lung cancer. Why? Because tobacco studies are, by nature, observational. However, after 30 years of studies showing a link between the two time and time again, the chance that there is no link is so unfathomably small that it can be safely discounted. As it so happens, you'll find every single scrap of evidence points to marijuana use leading to a shorter lifespan. Believe me, there is plenty of evidence. What, you don't believe me? In 2004, Labour decided to downgrade cannabis in Great Britain, from a class B to a class C drug. Deaths due to drug overdoses soared 15% in that year. An internal Downing street report showed that the downgrading of cannabis had lead young people to use it more frequently. As a result, many of them became lured to "harder" drugs (the so-called "gateway drug" effect) and eventually died of overdoses (you can read all about it here: . http://www.dailymail.co.uk...) Another UK study extrapolated figures from a less harmful drug, tobacco (yes, tobacco is far less harmful - I can expand on this point later, but here's the report: . http://news.bbc.co.uk...). They found 30,000 deaths every year were directly attributable to cannabis (it doesn't make for nice reading, but here's the link: . http://www.independent.co.uk...). So we can see that there very probably is a link between death and cannabis use. But that's not really the right question, is it? The question is not "how many idiots who use this drug will legalisation kill off for us? " but rather "how many idiots will it leave in our hospital system where we'll need to pay for them with our taxes? " The fact is, cannabis is highly addictive, does terrible things to people's lungs and causes mental illness, even where it does not cause death (see . http://www.dailymail.co.uk...). There is also a string of cardiovascular problems strongly linked to long-term marijuana use (. http://en.wikipedia.org...). This essentially equates to a huge drain on society. But even this isn't really a good reason for legalization, even if my opponent is right. After all, bulletproof vests won't kill me, but that doesn't mean you can get them without a license. The point is, the argument doesn't stand. 2) It has many uses, and is perceived as harmless by many Here my opponent is really saying this: "because I hold such and such subjective opinion about marijuana, it should be legalized. " Heroin also has many uses and is percieved as harmless by the many heroin addicts in the world. That's not a good reason to allow heroin. Equally, no good reason for dope. So there you have it. My opponent's support is groundless, and his burden of proof is not yet met.