Marijuana should not be legalized
Debate Rounds (1)
In my opinion marijuana should not be legalized under any circumstances because of the following reasons:
1. Marijuana is often used as a stage between "harmless" drugs and much more dangerous. People start from using just marijuana, but they get used to the feeling of being "high" and want something stronger. Marijuana is often an experimental drug. Once people see that this drug is not so strong they decide to try other more harmful drugs. This is the start of a serious addiction.
2. Legalization of marijuana may lead to cases of children smoking this drug. In our society, it is prohibited to smoke or drink if you are underage. However, there are still cases of young teenagers smoking and drinking. This happens because alcohol and cigarettes are not completely prohibited. It is easy to buy them in any store. Therefore, youth can find loopholes such as asking someone older to buy them cigarettes and alcoholic drinks by paying them. If marijuana is legalized, the same might happen with drugs.
3. Although some studies argue, marijuana is proved to seriously damage people's brains, lungs. Using drugs usually leads to depressions and memory loosing.
4. It is proved by researches that biggest part of crimes is committed under drugs, even marijuana. People who smoke marijuana have a feeling that they can do anything. They are not able to think clearly. Their minds are blurry. Therefore, those people can easily commit a crime without even knowing that.
5. Legalization of marijuana may lead to the legalization of much more dangerous drugs. People may see that there is a right to make your own life choices. Some of them can demand legalization of drugs such as heroin, cocaine. If one form of drugs is legal, then why not to legalize others? This question will eventually pop up.
Therefore, we should never consider legalizing marijuana.
Your first paragraph refers to the "gateway" argument, which says Marijuana naturally leads people to try increasingly lethal drugs. While a general correlation does exist, its important to note that correlation isn"t causation. For instance, nearly all members of violent motorcycle gangs rode bicycles as children. By your logic, that would necessitate the outlawing of bicycles, which would be ludicrous. A congress study also found that, "There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs."
Your second paragraph refers to the danger of legalizing Marijuana; for fear that underage children abuse it. This opens up a slippery slope. Should we ban all types of alcohol, drugs, medicines, knives, guns, and cars, simply because its inevitable that they will be abused by an underage child somewhere?
Your third paragraph accurately states that Marijuana is bad for your health. However, so is fast-food, alcohol, tobacco, chlorine in swimming pools, and over-the-counter medicine. Should we illegalize all that as well?
The "study" you refer to (4th paragraph), that links Marijuana to crime, is pretty shallow. For one, the researchers didn"t look at whether the offenders in question were also on alcohol at the time of arrest. This is a problem, as alcohol has a strong correlation to violence, which was likely covered up by the researchers focus on Marijuana. Furthermore, Marijuana is by far the most widely used illicit drug, meaning it was statistically expected for a large portion of criminals to have Marijuana in their system.
It should also be noted that Marijuana has less of an effect on your mental awareness, then alcohol, and many prescription drugs.
Your final paragraph addresses the "slippery slope" argument, warning that legalizing Marijuana could lead to the legalization of other illicit drugs. This is somewhat fallacious, as this argument could be made about anything. Should we illegalize guns, for fear missiles are someday legalized? What about cars and jets? Gay-marriage leading to the acceptance of marrying animals? The list is infinite, and unless you are willing to band ALL of it, then this position is inconsistent.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by LoopsEye 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Well I agree with Pro before and after the long debate lol, Conduct I found Pro being pleasant so Conduct to him Grammer is a Tie. But Argument of Con was convincing and He used source also. It was a neutral debate. BTW and 1 Round?
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.