Legalization of Drugs in the United States

Your open-mind is helping us to move in the right direction as a nation. I would also like to thank my opponent for taking this debate. I will begin by summarizing three popular arguments for the prohibition of drugs, and explain why these are not valid justifications for prohibition. I will focus mainly on the popular drugs that are still in Schedule I—the highest ranking of a "dangerous drug", under federal law. Contention 1 - Life and Health of Users I read the following statement in a related debate: "…illegal drugs have no medical benefit and lead to psychological and physical dependency. " It is wrong to suggest that illegal drugs have no medical benefit. I will give several examples of popular illegal drugs with recognized medical use, in order to show the audience that our current drug policy is inaccurate, at best. A) Marijuana: Has undoubtedly proven to have medicinal use, and to this day has not taken a single life due to overdose. It is ranked as a higher threat than both cocaine and methamphetamine (speed), by Federal Scheduling. This is a prime example of our radical, unrealistic drug policy. . http://www.erowid.org... B) MDMA(Ecstasy): MDMA was synthesized in 1965 by Dr. Alexander Shulgin. After analyzing the drug's effects himself, he offered MDMA for experimentation to psychologist and friend Leo Zeff, who was preparing for retirement. Several days later, Shulgin receives a call from Zeff, who had tried the MDMA. He no longer wanted to retire. Zeff immediately begins practice with MDMA for a wide array of psychological disorders, particularly for it's ability to help patients overcome emotional barriers. By the time Dr. Zeff passed away years later, his network of therapists administering the drug to patients rose to over 4,000. Today, there are trials considering MDMA as a primary treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. . http://www.cognitiveliberty.org... C) Cocaine: It is the only naturally occurring local anesthetic in medical use today. It is still used in hospitals for operative procedures of the nose and throat, as well as for dermal lacerations in children. . http://emedicine.medscape.com... I hope I have shown these drugs have some medical use and, for certain people, may be beneficial. To suggest that the majority of illegal drugs used are addictive, both physically and psychologically, is more than just a generalization. The majority of the illegal drug market is for marijuana. Marijuana is not physically addictive in recreational doses. The psychological addiction of marijuana is identical to an addiction to video games, television, or sex. MDMA shares the same type of non-physical addiction. The article below shows a recent study performed by Professor David Nutt from the University of Bristol, and Professor Colin Blakemore, Chief Executive of the Medical Research Council UK. They ranked a variety of illegal drugs based on addiction, the actual harm to the user, to their families and communities, and society. The results were promising and showed that alcohol, a very legal drug, is quite near the top of the list. . http://www.sciencedaily.com... . http://www.infactah.com... As with alcohol, individuals should be held accountable for their actions, and charged accordingly. People should not be arrested for simply possessing these substances, as we cannot distinguish responsible users from irresponsible addicts. Contention 2 – A Rise in Crime There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that crime would increase with the legalization of any drug. In fact, there is evidence to suggest the opposite. Prohibition of Alcohol in the 1920's led to the creation of a black market, and gang-lords like Al Capone. Everyone would still drink alcohol, but now they were criminals who purchased their drinks on the black market. There were gang wars involving alcohol, in which many lives were lost. Since there will always be a demand for drugs, the prohibition of any substance will directly lead to the creation of a black market, and more violence. A recent change of policy in Switzerland supports this principle. In 1994, Swiss voters legalized heroin in a clinical setting. Addicts are given free heroin at local clinics in regulated amounts, supervised by a nurse. This led to a drop in ALL drug-related crime. In addition to keeping addicts from committing crime to pay for their habit, it also reduced the occurrence of open-drug scenes, and helped addicts to live more responsible lives by attending the clinic twice a day for their "treatment". The mortality rate (death) of heroin users dropped from 2.5% to 1% after legalization. This is another clear example of how the elimination of a black market, and offering support to addicts, can help a society as a whole. . http://www.drugwarfacts.org... . http://www.sciencedirect.com... There is no reason to believe that the amount of DUI's involving recreational drugs would increase after legalization. Users who make the mistake of driving while intoxicated did just that—they drove while intoxicated. People who drive while on speed, coke, crack, heroin, or otherwise would most likely drive on alcohol, as well. Those who would drive while on these drugs probably already do. The supposition that the amount of irresponsible drivers would increase if drugs were legalized is unrelated and absurd. In addition, when someone is already catalogued as a criminal, they are more likely to commit crimes. We see this every day as people leave our prison system, only to return a few weeks later. There are many addicts who don't want to be criminals, they just want to use their drug of choice, safely and uninterrupted. But when society and law already label them as criminals anyway, what's to stop them from deciding to drive a few miles while high? For our own safety, we have to legalize these drugs. Contention 3 – Legalization Will Not Increase Popularity or Usage The most popular argument against legalization is that it would increase usage. Most would agree that during alcohol prohibition, there was no change in usage. One study suggests there may have been a very slight decrease in alcohol-related deaths during prohibition, but there was a gradual decrease in the years before prohibition, which suggests that it simply lost popularity during this time. Negative propaganda flooded the media, and citizens were promised positive change with the prohibition of alcohol: "The reign of tears is over. The slums will soon be a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corncribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile, and the children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent. " - quoted in Kohler, 1973, 12. But for those who wanted alcohol, there was surely no change. Consumption was virtually the same before, during, and after prohibition. Another significant bit of research is that of the Netherlands, where marijuana became legal. Upon legalization, marijuana usage in the Netherlands stayed constant, and much lower than that of the U. S. However, once it was popularized with marijuana-based coffee shops, tourism brought an increase in the 1980's. This suggests that usage is not determined by legality, but by popularity. . http://berkeley.edu... I am truly grateful for the opportunity to debate this topic, and I thank all of you who have read along thus far. To my opponent, I am eager to hear your opposition and I thank you for your time.