Drugs should be legalized.

You don't have to answer my rebuttals, but otherwise I obviously win those arguments because you don't reject or defend your original statement that the rebuttal addresses. Also my own material that you cite I fail to provide are the environmental harms argument and the economic harms argument. More so my job as the con is only to refute your arguments, you have the burden of proof as the pro. First your argument on rehabilitationYou say "The fact that we have a rehabilitation center which people can go to, if they feel like they want to, is just not enough. As I said before, if made legal, we can monitor who is addicted."1.) That is not the governments job to clean up after people whom have chosen to take a course of action that is ultimately destructive towards themselves. Legalizing drugs gives people the Autonomy over their body to take whatever they want but this then becomes something they have to be personally responsible for. The government provides resources, education, and outreach but ultimately, as your study shows, most drug addicts don't want treatment. According to your own study, the most common reason for those who needed treatment but did not receive it was "Not ready to stop using (38.8 percent)." [1] and the second was because "No health coverage/could not afford cost(32.1 percent)." [1] These two elements alone make up that majority of why drug addicts don't want treatment. It's because either A. They have no interest in stopping abuse or B. Can't afford it. According to you own study the illegality of drugs is not why people refuse to get treatment.According to James Q. Wilson a Collins Professor of Management and Public Policy "There are some drug-dependent people who genuinely want treatment and will remain in it if offered; they should receive it. But there are far more who want only short-term help after a bad crash; once stabilized and bathed, they are back on the street again, hustling. And even many of the addicts who enroll in a program honestly wanting help drop out after a short while when they discover that help takes time and commitment. Drug-dependent people have very short time horizons and a weak capacity for commitment." [2]2.) There will always be a black market. If drugs were legalized, they would be taxed, this is a fairly obvious point that even the pro admits will happen in his economics argument earlier with his Miron study. If the government taxes it, the black Market can undercut prices. For people in poverty who are the primary users of drugs (a point which has gone uncontested through out the debate) they will almost always choose the cheapest source. Also, children will always be an illegal market that the dealers can pander to, because (hopefully) we would still have age stipulations on whom can use narcotics. Phillip Bean says "There will always remain a black market for drugs and and illegal system to supply them." [3] My opponent claims this won't increase foreign drugs production, but this is still false. Instead of the farm land supplying drugs to just dealers, they will be supplying drugs to illegal dealers and legal dealers of narcotics in the US.3.) He talks about the Coca farming. I've once again presented while though it may not be as economical, if they are tired of people burning their land maybe they should plant something that isn't illegal. More than that even if we legalize drugs Colombia would still find a way to destroy the Coca farms because the Colombian government opposes them. That is the only reason they allow us to conduct the pesticide/herbicide raids in the first place. If we weren't doing it the Colombian government would in some capacity.4.) The health care increase problem. You say " Is he saying that we shouldn't treat all people with addictions?"That's not what I said at all. What my argument said is that someone is going to have to pay for all of that and since most drug addicts are in poverty, guess who gets stuck with the bill? The American taxpayers and the already overburdened health care system. I'm not saying we shouldn't treat people with addictions, I'm saying due to the health care costs we shouldn't enable more addictions.5.) Most importantly, legalizing drugs would have severe impacts on health, the quality of life and would increase the number of addicts. According to a CNN article legalization of just Marijuana in Amsterdam led to "an increase in drug addictions and dependency followed by illegal drug trafficking, human trafficking and crime." [4] Because of said increases, the country is going to ban foreigners from its potshops in 2013. Also, Portugal decriminalized all drugs and in 2007 had the most cases of Drug Injected AIDS in the world. It also is one of the only countries to have an increase by 30% of drug overdoses in 2005. The article wisely notes "Drugs are not harmful because they are illegal, they are illegal because they are harmful." Addictions would increase, violence would increase, and crime would increase. The economic costs but importantly the costs of the degradation of life in a society would be substantially worse.6.) The war on drugs has been successful, despite your claims here are the statistics. Drug controls slashed global opium supply dramatically: in 2007, it was one-third the level of 1907. What about recent trends? Over the last 10 years, world output of cocaine, amphetamines and ecstasy has stabilised, and in many instances dropped. Cannabis output has declined since 2004. Since the mid-90s, opium production moved from the Golden Triangle to Afghanistan where it grew exponentially at first, but started to decline (since 2008). [5]In summary, the pro fails to prove why illegal substances should be legalized because ultimately, there are huge implications for us. Economic implications that stem from having a less productive workforce and a more dangerous one at that, as well as having to pay more for health care and insurances, and pay for a larger police force. Societal implications of a systemic black market that targets the poor and children, paying for the production of illegal substances in other countries that cause environmental impacts, and higher rates of crime and poverty. Society has already felt the pains of alcoholism and how its tore individuals and families apart. Implementing a policy like this would recklessly add countless more destroyed by cocaine, LSD, Heroin, PCP, and even Marijuana.The pro has failed to meet the burden of proof to provide why Drugs should be legalized. Vote Con[1] http://www.elementsbehavioralhealth.com...[2]http://faculty.mdc.edu...[2]http://faculty.mdc.edu...[3]http://goo.gl...[4]http://www.cnn.com...[5] http://www.guardian.co.uk...