TBD: To Be decided by Con.

"Sure they have that right, but they have the right also to the better and less expensive cigarette version of marijuana. One right does not cancel out the other in this case." My Response: My opponents essential thesis is flawed because smoking marijuana is illegal. It would be beneficial to make LSD laced with codeine to relieve the pain of a cancer patient, but that's illegal. Everyone should be seen as equal with the law, even Cancer patients. My opponent then says that marinol knocks people out. I would say that this is a positive thing. One reason for morphine is because for some people it knocks them out. This gives very strong reliever of pain. Thus marinol relieves more pain. She then goes on to say that marinol is too expensive. This is indeed false. According to the US department of Health, marinol, used for cancer patients cost at the most $200. And could be even cheaper if insurance pays for it. My opponent then says its not effective for this reason. Marinol lasts longer because it's digested, thus more pain is relieved in comparison to smoking it. Thus, it is indeed more effective because it relieves pain. I concede my opponents point about side effects. I was not aware, thank you Xera. However, it doesn't really matter because most of these side effects help in the pain relieving process. Also, I never mentioned damaging lungs. My oppoent then cites a source refuting my crime prevention point. This is falwed because never before has smoking been used. Thus, there is no line of reference if it would go up or down. My FBI point is not a stat (Should have said before). The FBI is just using logic. If smoking marijuana is available by hospitals. Criminals would somehow get a hold of them Thus more marijuana is available. Furthermore, a lot of deadly crimes are committed over drugs, if the supply increases then more people would be looking, and more crime would occur. Her case: My Response: This is a valid point. However, most hospitals would induce depressants on the patient to temporarily stop vomiting. This would give them time to give them the pill and time for it to start digesting. Thus, you can drop my opponents point. She then goes on to bring the costs. My oppoent first of all is not inclusing the following: A) Insurance B) Type of Illness C) Government help These 3 factors decrease the cost significantly. As I brought up before, sometimes less then $200. =============================================================================== My Case Contention I. Pill form (Marinol) Links up above Contention II. Liquid form marijuana. A new form of marijuana that has started in Britain is moving to the US. Its marijuana taken through a dipper. I.e. a needle attached to a machine that drips a liquid into the blood stream. Or taken as a Spray through the mouth. It has also been approved in Canada. This new method takes the pros of pill marijuana and smoking marijuana. It has all the benefits, with limited side effects. It is also cost efficient. It beats pill and smoke on: Cost, efficiency, etc. Conclusion: These 2 methods MUST be used instead of the illegal smoking marijuana. The pill form is available in the US now, and the liquid version is being made by US pharmaceutical companies, with the help of Britain. Both of these methods are more efficient, and cost effective. AND THEY ARE NOT ILLEGAL. Thus I urge an affirmation of the resolution. Thank you ladies and gentlemen.