Opium Should be Legalized

Thank you Victorian for responding. I will proceed to address some of the contentions that have been brought up in the previous rounds. Economically Harmful 1. I would not like this to evolve into a semantic debate but due to unfortunate circumstances and my opponent's inability to differentiate between an association and a direct correlation forces me to get into technicalities. A "cousin" is a thing related or analogous to another. In this case morphine and opium are associative cousins, NOT directly correlated items. They are related to each other in the sense that they are both drugs that are exercised for the purposes of mitigating physical pain and irritation - they are applied with similar objectives in mind, for instance, to increase euphoria, create pleasure and block unpleasant memories. My opponent is facilitating a fallacious remark when he makes the baseless claim that morphine is opium. According to http://en.wikipedia.org..., morphine is a derived opioid, such as oxycodone, hydromorphone, and diacetylmorphine (heroin). An opioid is an opiumlike compound that binds to one or more of the three opioid receptors of the body; an etymology provided by Merriam Webster to further establish my skepticisms in your claim: possessing some properties characteristic of opiate narcotics but not derived from opium http://www.merriam-webster.com.... I'd like to emphasize the fact that it is "opiumlike" and does NOT have the fundamentally identical chemical constitution to that of recreational opium. The same logical reasoning applies to that of heroin, an opioid derived from morphine http://en.wikipedia.org.... Ergo, I do not have to address laudanum, an opioid. I'd like to enforce a critical posit that my opponent does not endorse. Morphine is clinically legal, but only with prescription from a trained physician. The physician will ensure that the patient is able-bodied and is in a physically and psychologically ample condition prior to prescribing morphine in regular, sustained doses. In fact, morphine is the most widespread analgesic in practical medical use as of this moment. There is near nil paperwork implicated in prescribing an opiate medication for a patient; you only require a trained physician and a healthy patient. I also would like to ask my opponent to cite his sources, as much of what he claims is untrue or erroneous. 2. My opponent claims that opium was not legalized in the 19th century. This is de facto incorrect, referencing back to the reliable source that I had posted in the previous round, and the agreement from the remainder of the web; http://www.infoplease.com.... The opium-dependent bourgeoisie that I had referred to in the previous round are no longer able-bodied citizens after overindulging and binging on opium and its derivatives. They are permanently hooked on this substance and will be musing about consuming the drug during every second available to them. They lose absolute functionality because they are fully dependent on the drug, and if deprived of it, will recklessly spend all of their money to obtain the drug, or even push themselves to physical limits to embezzle it. I'd like to continue to refute my opponent's arguments by quoting a sentiment presented by him. "The author Wilkie Collins was an opium (laudanum) user and later an addict. This did not prevent him from inventing the detective genre, in fact, he wrote much of his famous novel The Moonstone while under the influence of opium." According to http://en.wikipedia.org..., Wilkie Collins was an inherently brilliant writer and did publish some exquisite novels (The Woman in White, Armadale and No Name) during his lifetime, procuring recognition and praise from his local community and posthumously, the greater region around him. There are some men who have a less reactive and less responsive immune system, especially to substances like opium. Opium's potency and addictiveness varies from person to person and have different effects on people depending on their genetics and health. I am not making the false claim that Collins was one of these men but rather I'd like to point out the fact that Collins wrote and published the novel, 'The Moonstone' while on an opium binge. After critics have analysed the publication long after his burial and death, they have deemed the quality of his writing incomparable (in a negative way) to the previous novels that he had published during his lifetime. "He continued to publish novels and other works throughout the 1870s and 80s, but the quality of his writing declined along with his health." http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. No, Heroin is not opium. It is an opioid and its chemical constitution deviates from that of opium. http://en.wikipedia.org... 4. I'd like to refute this statement by enforcing the fact that opium, morphine and heroin are all not party drugs and are exclusively low-profile, uncharacteristic drugs. Opium was first introduced as a painkiller, in fact, the first analgesic in its respected field. "Opium is obtained from the opium poppy (papaver somniferum) by scraping the unripe seed capsule, and then collecting and drying the rubbery exudate." http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk... Morphine was the first alkaloid and heroin was a subsequent derivation that was synthesised by acetylation. They all appear in the field of anaesthetics and analgesics, and have superseded their own potency and addictiveness throughout the generations. I'd like to emphasize that painkillers are a very minute aspect of the entire medical industry, and are not paramount to the mal-effects of high-profile drugs that incite side effects and deformities that initially demand the need for opium and its derivatives. Morally Wrong My opponent requests that I provide a governmental justification for my suggestion of harsher penalties for opium users. I'd like to counter by querying him; why is it not morally justified to impose harsher punishments to the opium users, which, if done in mass, can infiltrate the drug dealers and traffickers? The drug users do not have to be tortured before interrogation (which was the case only a century ago) but instead you can alleviate the sentencing time span and the user becomes inclined to agree to the terms. I do not see the relevance of my opponent's analogy of the mugger and his passion for the arts. Threat to National Security 1. The ban on poppy was in fact short-lived, lasting only a few months during 2000, which was intended to be a season of mass cultivation. But nonetheless, it was extremely effective; to quote from Wikipedia, "Illicit opium production, now dominated by Afghanistan, was decimated in 2000, when production was banned by the Taliban, but has increased steadily since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 and over the course of the war in Afghanistan. Worldwide production in 2006 was 6610 metric tons"about one-fifth the level of production in 1906." Despite the fact that the ban was enforced for only a brief period of time, the production levels have increased exponentially. This is a fact, http://en.wikipedia.org.... 2. My opponent demonstrates that he is able to narrate a scenario, but evidently unable to make a connection back to the given proposition. What is the significance of the U.S police force making an approach to demolishing poppy fields. How does this support your stance? 1. I agree with his sentiments but I am not obligated to propose a counterargument since no coherent attack has been initiated by Pro. 5. Since I have a limited amount of characters remaining I will have to address his concerns with this statistic along with his other rebuttals in the subsequent round, which will determine the result of this debate. I now eagerly await my opponent's counterarguments.