Marijuana Legislation

Kids would be able to get high off of hemp paper, they would be able to buy large amounts and it would be cheap. Also you say kids wouldnt try it because it could kill them? Well then why would kids to any drugs or tobacco products. Kids dont care what it will do to their body, this has been proven through many other drug overdoses. So that is not dismissed Also marijuana has been linked to causing cancer, kills brain cells, effects perception and coordination, and increases the chance of a heart attack by four times. This is not a drug we should ingest into our bodies. . http://www.thehealersjournal.com... Also my concern with the paper industry is that you want to replace the production of paper from trees to hemp. So that is obviously going to hurt to paper industry. Also you said that the national forest where being destroyed and i presented evidence against that, and since you did not respond that argument of yours is dismissed. You give all these percentages about how the paper industry is growing but you want to replace paper with hemp, this will cause the wood industry to decline In your opinion this regulated distribution would keep drugs away from kids, but we use the same system as alcohol and kids still drink it on a regular basis, so this would not necessarily be the case. And i could care less if you disapprove of me calling marijuana a drug. Because it is a drug. It is known as a drug by both sides of this national debate, the only issue is if the drug is a good or bad one, and it is a bad drug! And i do have truth in my debate, I have never contradicted my self like you pro has. that was not a simple typo he was wrong and does not want to admit it. I bring this up again because it shows that all he does is copy and paste form a website, that is not a debate! "(a pathetic attempt by Con to try and win). " THis was the comment made by pro before i thanked him for winning the debate for me, If he wants to win votes by calling me cheeky and rude i will do the same thing, however this is not how this debate should be conducted it has been a main point in all of pros arguments. And yes he does have the right to use sources, but he does not have the right to just copy and paste. If you handed that in as a paper at school would it be accepted? NO! you have to bring your own ideas to the table and put articles in your own words, this is why pro contradicts himself. And i will respond to that pro, thank you. I did not contradict all of the points because some of the points he made i conceded to. Like all the hemp facts i conceded to be true, except the one where he said it had NO THC, but i did debate all other of his points which concerned legalization. Just because it was the strongest corlike material does not mean it needs to be legalized. Also con also did not refute some of my arguments made So here is how i see this debate, 1. poorly organized by pro 2. very disorganized 3. He cuts and pastes 4. He contradicted himself on the MAIN issue of this debate and if you reread it, it was not a mistype but he was very confident that Hemp did not have THC. If he doesnt even know the facts we should not vote pro 5. Pro has had to backtrack this entire debate because he screwed up and he knows it.