This house would legalize the use of marijuana

I thank Con for his patience and understanding. I confused BOP with my other debate. I agree with Con. I will begin my case now. Counter 1: Marijuana is harmful I remember I never did argue that marijuana causes no harm at all but I have advocated the idea that the “harm” of marijuana is not baleful enough for it to be categorized as illegal. So I ask voters to not decide based on validity of a source since it is undeniable that marijuana is not helpful to human body. But the essence here is if the harm is so harmful to be illegal and my opponent failed to prove that. I for my part successfully negated the premise that marijuana is unquestionably detrimental to human health in any form and any way taken. I have shown valid that marijuana not that dangerous. The fact that there are so many studies that show otherwise already undermines the danger severity of marijuana. I will refute few individual points under this first argument by Con. My opponent pointed out that legalization of cannabis will increase use among underage and pointed out statistics regarding adversary effects of underage usage of marijuana. While I would like to point out that the fact that marijuana is illegal can give stronger incentive and curiosity for teenagers to try marijuana, I would also like to mention the case of Netherland that legalized marijuana for two decades and yet has a lower rate of underage marijuana usage [1] than the US. The same source also explains that there is no evidence to support the claim that depenalization increased levels of cannabis use. My opponent highlighted addiction. As he himself admitted, there are legal drugs that are proven to have stronger addiction than marijuana. Additionally, we really need to examine the term “addiction”. Due to the fact that marijuana affects dopamine, it is understandable how some users feel strong craving when the usage is ceased. Nevertheless, there are many sources that view these cravings as only psychological desire, not physical addiction [2]. I also have a whole list [List] of sources that directly refutes the idea of marijuana addiction. Bottom line, marijuana could be un-addictive and even if it is, addiction would not be as severe as addiction of legal drugs. Just about anything can cause addiction, depending on what “addiction” here means. My opponent also mentioned some physical effects of marijuana. I have a source from Washington Post [3] that refutes marijuana and lung cancer correlation. Here is another source that disproves theory that pot causes brain damage [4]. If marijuana causes depression, why would anyone smoke marijuana? But again, I am not saying that marijuana is healthy to human body. But the essence is that the harm being discussed surely is not reasonable enough to make marijuana illegal for any longer. This is the graph on The Economist link that did not function. This graph, from a reliable medical journal, is enough to neutralize argument on health aspect of marijuana since marijuana is obviously not helpful but the harm is marginal. Please keep in mind that marijuana caused 17 lives in England and Wales where 7 million people are estimated to have taken marijuana. At the same year, 22 lives were lost by headache medicine, Aspirin and countless died from perfectly legal drugs, alcohol and cigarette. One’s freedom can be sacrificed for greater good. But facts and figures explain that marijuana’s harm cannot serve as reason for illegality of marijuana. Counter 2: Gateway Theory The gateway argument was touched by Con. Gateway theory is inaccurate. The link from Con already refutes gateway effect. While Yale claims the theory, government authority publicly denounces this theory and calls it “…just another propaganda study that tries to turn a casual relationship into a causal relationship”. There is no strong evidence to prove the theory, but there is list of experiments [5, 6, 7 and 8] that disprove link between marijuana usage and usage of harder drugs. However, the same government authority that denounced the gateway theory publicly admitted a positive correlation between cigarette and use of cocaine [9, 10]. Surgeon General’s Report also reported that smoking led to tripling the likelihood to drink alcohol, increasing likelihood to smoke pot by eight times and 22 times to use cocaine. At the end of the day, marijuana does not cause gateway effect but legal drugs are in fact proven to have gateway effects. The only way how marijuana might cause its users abusing other drug is if underground dealer selling weed recommends the harder drugs. However, this problem would be eliminated once marijuana is legalized. Then, users would stop trading with underground dealers. Counter 3: Increasing Usage Firstly, I will refute examples given by Con. The Alaska example is in favor to my side of the argument. Marijuana arrest in Alaska in fact decreased about -6% yearly when there was a national increase of 2.19% annually, from 2003~2007 [11]. As my previous source indicates, marijuana usage in Netherland is about half of US. In the year of 2005, lifetime prevalence of marijuana use in the US was 40.6% when the rate was 22.6% in Netherlands. Legalization does not cause more usage. Increase in usage can be positive result since it creates higher tax revenue. Secondly, it is not necessarily bad for cannabis usage to increase speaking under assumption that the usage will increase. My opponent only introduced the idea of increase in usage when he failed to land that on the motion. There is nothing so baleful about high rate of marijuana usage. In fact countries with the highest usage rates include thriving nations of the world like Canada, Australia and New Zealand. As long as marijuana users can be responsible just like they have been, legalization would not be any problem. Counter 4: Increasing Arrest It is impossible for legalization to increase arrests because most arrests are regarding possession. Moreover, Netherland has incarceration rate of 100 per 100,000 when US has a figure that is 75.6 times higher. The case of Alaska also supports my case. Legalization cannot correlate with higher marijuana arrest logically and factually. Please counter this contention directly. Counter 5: Gang Marijuana constitutes about 50% of total drug market. Con misinterpreted my case, saying legalization would educate drug dealers. The argument was that legalization will halve the total drug market since marijuana that formed half of the market will be legal. Marijuana users will be able to purchase safer, cheaper and better pot legally, without buying it underground. With drug market undermined, it would be easier for yearly budget of $15 billion battling illegal drug to combat rest half of the market. Legalization would not solve every part of illegal drug market. However, it can be greatly helpful. Counter 6: Financial Aspect The concern my opponent raised regarding marijuana’s harm to others is not only rebutted with graph from The Lancet posted above but also from just one simple answer: that marijuana will obviously have restrictions as well. As said in definition of motion, marijuana will be regulated. Employers can simply enforce one simple rule of “no marijuana during work” to defeat the danger Con suggested. But in return, US government can at least have $6.2 billion as tax revenue in return. Con also raised point with healthcare. But public healthcare is also enforced with tax of the nation and it is not completely free. Moreover, it is individuals who pay the price of their health deterioration in the end. We should leave it to the nation. Overall, harm of marijuana can be debated. But marijuana is not worse than legal drugs and their legalization will bring benefits from social, individual and economical aspects. Individuals are willing to take responsibility and consequence of marijuana. It is high time to legalize. References http://pastebin.ca... or http://pastebin.ca...;