Growing up some people or should issue kid was label add or ADHD . They were given adderoll . That a drug a bad one at that lasted year it killed 31,110 people .alcohol linked death 75,000 . Cigar and cigarettes kill evey year 440,000 . They by 2030 8 million people might die . But that a guess . If it was legal the government can tax on it like they do with alcohol or cigar or cigarettes . And they can I. D the people they would have to be the age of 21 year of age . And the kills with devoting minds don't get of hold of weed only 21 years of age group to the age 100 years etc. I think it a right of American they to make there choice . Water can kill you if you drink to much . Enough said if water a need and if u drink to much of it is bad . Same rule applies to everything etc .
I think this is quite an interesting position to take as the core of your argument can be summarized by, "if other greater evils exist, then a lesser evil can persist." But, how do we measure the means of which is more evil than the other? Most will use a "barometer of death" to weigh the greater evil and, as you"ve demonstrated, this "barometer" satisfies your inquiry into the degreed evils of vice. I don"t care to fact check your statistic of deaths linked to alcohol and tobacco as the number is arbitrary for the purpose of this debate; we both agree that the aggregate of deaths from alcohol and tobacco are far higher than the handful of deaths attributed to impairment by THC. However, is this "barometer" an efficient and effective measure to make policy? Marijuana abuse may only lend to a dozen deaths a year but that doesn"t necessarily construct a sound argument for its legalization. Currently marijuana is classified as a Controlled I Substance and, in my opinion, the largest criticism this continual reauthorization of this classification receives is a result of the third and last criterion of requirement to be listed as a Controlled I Substance: "the drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." We know this not to be true, science tells us that. THC has been proven to reduce nausea in chemotherapy recipients; dull pain, and in some cases, better than opiates; reduce the amount of seizures and sporadic anxious brain activity; and spur appetite. Yet with marijuana"s vast list of medicinal uses its still classified as a Scheduled I drug. How can this be? I"ll tell you. Firstly: Marinol. It is a drug whose derivative stems from THC, and because we are limited to 5000 words, but mostly because I"m not a chemical engineer, I can"t intimately describe the in-depth process of producing Marinol. However, as it was "to make a long story short," Marinol is essentially all of the medicinal perks of THC without the impairment or euphoria. Secondly and lastly, there are two other criterions that seem to be virtually untouched by the critics of marijuana"s classification as a Schedule I substance:
1. The drug has a high potential for abuse
2. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision
No one seems to argue that, even as the tightest regulated controlled substance, marijuana isn't the most abused drug in America. Because, you can"t. Because it is, which means it overwhelmingly meets the requirements for "high potential for abuse." Anecdotally, 1 should satisfy 2, because I can"t tell you how many time I"ve heard "yo, you have to try this bombass bud, bro " my buddy has a medicinal license in Cali and sold me half!!" However, in the larger scheme of policy making given the high propensity and rate of marijuana abuse I viscerally feel that 1 will satisfy 2 every time.