The United States should decriminalize drugs.

RebuttalsHarm PrincipleHere, Pro contends that people essentially have the right to take illegal drugs--all the while still acknowledging their harms. However if there was nothing inherently wrong with harming oneself, things like traditional self-harm (mutilation of the body) and suicide would not be considered as reason to hospitalise, or strongly indicative of psychiatric illness. [21.] http://www.webmd.com...As this source states, legally, people are hospitalised (taken away from the community) for unspecified periods of times when they are 'at risk of hurting themselves or others'.Assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia also show that the choice to harm oneself is indeed heavily limited; and illegal in many circumstances. At present, euthanasia is illegal in the U.S, while physician assisted suicide is only legal (and of course, heavily monitored) in six U.S states. [22.] http://www.cnn.com...How Our Choices Impact OthersIt's important to note that the choices we make, will always have consequences on those around us--for example, the family members of someone who has taken illegal drugs for recreational use and since become addicted, will undoubtedly be affected, and the individuals ability to function normally will be severely impacted; since addiction is all-consuming.'A growing body of literature suggests that substance abuse has distinct effects on different family structures. For example, the parent of small children may attempt to compensate for deficiencies that his or her substanceR08;abusing spouse has developed as a consequence of that substance abuse (Brown and Lewis 1999). Frequently, children may act as surrogate spouses for the parent who abuses substances. For example, children may develop elaborate systems of denial to protect themselves against the reality of the parent’s addiction. Because that option does not exist in a single parent household with a parent who abuses substances, children are likely to behave in a manner that is not age appropriate to compensate for the parental deficiency.''Neighbors, friends, and coworkers also experience the effects of substance abuse because a person who abuses substances often is unreliable. Friends may be asked to help financially or in other ways. Coworkers may be forced to compensate for decreased productivity or carry a disproportionate share of the workload. As a consequence, they may resent the person abusing substances.''People who abuse substances are likely to find themselves increasingly isolated from their families. Often they prefer associating with others who abuse substances or participate in some other form of antisocial activity. These associates support and reinforce each other’s behavior.''Substance abuse can intensify problems and become an impediment to a stepfamily’s integration and stability. When substance abuse is part of the family, unique issues can arise. Such issues might include parental authority disputes, sexual or physical abuse, and self esteem problems for children.'[23.] Chapter 2 of Impact of Substance Abuse on Families, p.3,4,7,8, 31.In addition:'Children whose parents abuse alcohol and other drugs are almost 3 times likelier to be physically or sexually assaulted and more than 4 times likelier to be neglected by their parents compared to children of parents who are not substance abusers.''With 28 million children of alcoholics and several million children of other drug abusers, children and adults in America who, during their lives, have been neglected and/or physically and sexually assaulted by substance-abusing parents constitute a significant portion of our population.'[24.] https://www.centeronaddiction.org...The reason I'm including a source specifically referring to alcohol use, is to demonstrate that when a drug is legal, it is more readily available--that is partly why there's a higher percentage of people abusing alcohol as a substance.So, it's quite obvious that drugs are inherently harmful to ones environment--negatively impacting personal relationships and capacity to fulfill commitments. And this, of course, is in addition to the internal harms (I.E harms to physical and mental health.)Thus, the 'harm principle' that Pro put forward has more or less been negated--specifically as these 'harms' negatively impact others, and, as I initially argued, it's a well-established fact that people cannot freely decide to harm themselves (using the examples of body multilation, suicide attempts, etc.) without at least some form of intervention to prevent this behaviour.Prison SystemFirstly, we should establish that everyone in prison, regardless of the crime (and this refers to Pros 2nd source) is 'taking up beds'. The point is that drugs have a relatively high level of danger, and that's why they are illegal. Their status is supposed to serve as a deterrent in terms of what the physical, environmental, and criminal repercussions could be. Nothing regarding the present system in the I.S (in which people can receive sentences for drug possession, dealing, etc.) would particularly change if drugs were to be made legal--as I stated in round two, they would likely be further abused, this risks to society would be further increased. Essentially everyone in prison in taking up a bed, but they are to be held accountable for their actions.To use one example--it is legal to smoke/distribute cannabis in the state of Colarado; subsequently, personal use of the drug there is 42% higher than the national average. Teenage admissions for addiction to cannabis increased by 66% between 2011 and 2014. Moreover, disorderly conduct increased by 45% in the first year of legalization (2012-2013.) According to Colarado State Patrol, 77% of people tested positive for having cannabis in their system after having road traffic accidents. [25.] https://www.drugfreeworkplace.org...Pros 3rd source, argues that legalisation would equate more regulation but this is highly speculative. All the while, the article fully acknowledges the significant risks associated with drug use.Source 4 focuses more on the incarceration aspects, but again heavily ignores key points related to incarceration itself and why people are given jail sentences in the first place.There is nothing to really show, that legalising drugs would indeed be more beneficial than detrimental; especially in regards to health and society.Rather than actually legalising drugs--the U.S government should attempt to address the issues that often lead to drug use; such as poverty, lack of opportunity, lack of education, violence in the home, etc. The answer isn't to make the 'quick-fix' (drug use) more accessible but to penetrate the underlying factors relating to it.