Marijuana Should Be Legalized.

This is a topic that finds it's self in the back of the mind of youth of all demographics across the country. However, there are a few key issues that must be addressed here. I, coming from a high school that delves heavily in marijuana and other drugs (and hears this same story every single day) noticed a few problems in need of being addressed. On his tenth point talking about how prohibition has failed for over 75 years. My opponent mentions prohibition several times through out the round. This is clearly going to be one of the key arguments however, one may find that this argument holds no real clout in the debate. Just because people have been breaking marijuana regulations doesn't mean that we should legalize marijuana it just means that people have been breaking laws. This does nothing to further the affirmative's position. Furthermore, 25 million people is a mere fraction of the population of the United States. Don't let my opponent blow the image of marijuana out of proportion. Their ninth point deals heavily in demographics and the sad fact of statistics. While even if his statistics were true, which we can't be certain they are because he did not cite them (he could have made them up for all we know), these are the sad facts about demographics. Call me a racist but these populations are scientifically proven to be more prone to criminal activity. Another interesting point is that this argument is also completely irrelevant, as this again does absolutely nothing to further his position. Just because black people and Hispanics use marijuana doesn't warrant legalization. In his eighth point they talk about reducing teenage exposure to and sales of marijuana. However this is were we see a logical fallacy. If we accept his fourth point about marijuana being safe to be true, then why do we want to reduce exposure of marijuana among teens. My opponent finds him self in a double bind. Either he accepts marijuana to be a dangerous drug there by establishing the need to reduce exposure, or he concede his eight point and admits that there really is not need to reduce exposure. Logically they can't have both. Their seventh point talks about how legalization of marijuana would reduce the amount of money lost by the US. However, marijuana is not the only drug that would need to be legalized in order to effectively carry out the advantages that my opponent talks about. A good example of what my opponent is talking about would be the Mexican drug cartel. Simply legalizing marijuana would not be effective in reducing US economic losses, this is because the cartel deals in FAR more than simply marijuana. According to a news article in the Korea Times the cartel also deals in marijuana, heroin, methamphetamines and cocaine. .. drugs that the general American population would not be comfortable legalizing and for good reason. Simply legalizing marijuana would not be the cure all as my opponent would like to suggest. In my opponent's sixth point he makes a very appropriate point about the energy sector. He talks about hemp and bi-fuels. An advantage mentioned was reducing oil dependence. While this is great for us in America you cannot get rid of the economic dependence on oil and other fossil fuels in other parts of the world simply by legalizing marijuana here in the US. With out the United States (the largest exporter of oil in the world) places like: Angola, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iraq and even Mexico would suffer a dramatic economic blow. This radical economic downturn would destabilize societies all over the world. Furthermore, there will be no economic incentive for farmers to grow hemp and in the even that the Federal Government does provide an economic incentive farmers would flock to make this new investment. Fields that once grew corn and wheat would be dedicated to farming hemp. This shows that either nothing would happen or that food prices every where would suffer dramatically. My opponent's fourth and fifth point talk about how marijuana is not dangerous and its effects are blown out of proportion. He is right about how there are misconceptions, he is wrong that marijuana doesn't have its negative consequences. He starts off by placing great faith in people saying, "marijuana can be used moderately without harmful impacts". Even if this is true we cannot assume that everyone will use it responsibly. While it's true that you would have to smoke over 100 bowls of marijuana to overdose, it is also true that this is not the real danger in marijuana usage, far from it. The danger in marijuana is not chemical at all in fact, it is almost 100% psychological. Marijuana is not dangerous, people on marijuana are dangerous. Although it is not chemically addictive, the psychological dependence of many people is VERY strong. For legalizing marijuana to be beneficial to the government it would need to be put on a taxable market (which it would if legalized). However, taxation would eventually force marijuana underground again ultimately leaving legalization an ineffective and useless political gesture. My opponent's point two only applies when people use it responsibly, which we cannot assume they will (because it's not true). Don't be sheep to the flawed assumption that EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN who uses or will use marijuana does so responsibly and in a well informed manner. This is simply not true. In his final point my opponent plays the part of Martin Luther King Jr. touting about sanding up to the "injustice of marijuana probation" and refusing to "give up their long quest for justice". While this point is passionate, emotional and very pointed it ultimately fails to establish any footing within the debate. The 25 million users that he talks about are a mere fraction of the population. Clearly legalization would not uphold our country's democratic ideals of the right of the majority to prevail as 25 million is closer to 10% of the population than it is to 51%. Contrary to my opponents beliefs, there are informed people who oppose the legalization of marijuana. Don't let him blow the issue of marijuana legalization out of proportion as the fact remains that 25 million (although it sounds pretty big) is a mere fraction next to the hundreds of millions of people in America. Legalization, as now established, would be nothing more than a useless and ineffective political gesture. Whit that I urge you to stand with me in negation of the resolution. Thank you. :)