on this website it talks about how medical student say that weed is the least addictive drug of them all including caffeine in coffee. what does that say about how bad it can really be. When they are saying that coffee is more addictive and not consider a drug. coffee is has 1,500 chemical and weed is a natural plant.
then when people say marijuana causes cancer when they have no actually proof. the only reason they say that is becuase of the weed produces smoke but nothing from the weed actually causes cancer. Their is common food that causes cancer more effectively for example meat,salt, even dairy products. Its shows how all these everyday items are more dangerous then pot.
"The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this."
- Albert Einstein quote on Hemp
even our greatest mind understand how making certain drugs illegal just increases crimes rapidly. for example like prohibition in the 1920's on alcohol. when they maid liquor illegal for the reason to have a healthier America. the problem was many people didn't like that law. when this law was enforced they started to have organized crimes in exporting and making alcohol beverages. the only person who was able to give them out was doctor who were freely giving prescription.
its kind of how pot is being prescribed right now. I feel like we can always learn from our history. when prohibition was over crime rates decreased in exporting alcohol. The same can be done for marijuana.I got to ask why would we want to risk the youths life over a harmless drug in making them go to the streets to looking for pot?
thank you for coming in to this debate. this is my opening augment.
I thank my opponent for this debate. In order for PRO to win this debate, PRO must prove that legalizing marijuana has a net benefit to society. While PRO can explain how marijuana is less harmful then other drugs, this is not a criteria to show why a drug should be illegal or not. Instead, the main factor is the consequence of drug legalization, not the drug itself. I will show, while marijuana is less harmful then other drugs, marijuana should remain illegal due to the benefits of marijuana illegalization.
1) People will do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs.
As PRO has stated, marijuana is a relatively safe drug, in which I agree. Therefore since people will do illegal drugs anyways, the government might as well trick people into thinking that marijuana is “bad” and “edgy” so that they will not turn to harder drugs.
There are powerful incentives to do illegal activities as a child. The main motivation of course is because it makes one “cool”. Rebelling against a force that has the power to obliterate the entire earth’s population is seen as cool. It shows a willingness to take risks and assert one’s alpha dominance. Peer groups and females reward these people through sex, and social prestige. Studies have shown that teenagers and non-married people are more likely to commit crimes. The theory for this is that teenagers act this way to obtain relationships with women. The same trend has also been seen in science achievements and men are affected more by this then female. Female go for alpha males and one way to demonstrate this is to commit crimes.
While there are many alternative legal drugs, many teenagers choose instead to take illegal drugs. For example, Salvia is a very powerful psycheldic drug and can come in different levels of extract. The higher the extract, the more intense the psycheldic experience is. Yet marijuana is more popular then Salvia.
There are harder, more dangerous illegal drugs out there on the street that include cocaine, crystal meth and heroin. If marijuana is outlawed, then teenagers will just turn to alternative forms of drugs that are more potent.
1) Marijuana is not addictive
I agree that marijuana is not addictive, which is why it will not suffer some of the negative side-effects of prohibitation like other illegal drugs. For example, since marijuana is less addictive it is less likely to affect one personally, and one does not have to worry about the effects of admitting to doing drugs and facing the consequences, since one can more easily quit. The problem is much worse for a cocaine user, in which the substance is addictive, and the user has to choose between keeping the addiction or facing legal consequences and telling one’s family in order to quit.
There also will be less violent-related drug crimes, for example robbery to buy drugs, since the demand for marijuana is not high enough that one will harm others or rob places in order to buy marijuana.
2) Prohibition of drugs increases crime
PRO states how the prohibition of drugs, for example in the case of alcohol, leads to an increase in organized crime. However, PRO is not advocating a position that abolishes drugs, he’s advocating abolishing marijuana. This will not solve the organized crime problem. Cocaine and other drugs will still be legal, which are responsible for most organized crime. Legalizing marijuana will not decrease organized crime.
More so, as explained earlier, the main problems associated with drug prohibition is that drugs are addictive. Alcohol is addictive, so people are more likely to do horrible things to get it. However, PRO stated that marijuana is not addictive. In fact, prohibitation of many non-addictive substances have been successful. For example, it is illegal for toys to be made with lead paint. However, you do not see people shooting one another for lead paint toys just because of prohibition of lead paint toys.
why marijuana should be criminalized
going in to my first reason ill respond to crime and how you say people illegal drugs for the sake of it. that is true but our nation pays 68 billion dollars on containing prison which only 1/3 is non violent drug crimes. About half of these member are marijuana offenders. meaning 1/6 of nation prisoners are marijuana related. from those expenses we would be saving 11 billion dollars which could go towards are economy. Think about how sufficient that could do to this nation which is in a debit.
beneficial uses of pot,
my next argument is how you want to know the beneficial use of pot. take a look at California the way they use medical marijuana. pot is their leading cash cow in the state at coming up around 14 billion dollars a year. their next leading object comes to 7.4 billion dollars which is milk and cheese. now think what if this went around the whole nation helping us gain a huge amount of money off the taxation of pot. our nation is in a serious debit and unfortunately not looking any better. so in fact wouldn't we want to find a alternative solution to help our nation get more ahead.
Why certain foods are addictive and harmful but weed is supposedly wost,
Than you have to understand the medical use from marijuana. I want to be understood even thought saliva is legal but a more harmful drug the marijuana. this is a common fact to but unfortunately the government dose not care about the health of humanity in our society. it helps people with cancer actually eats foods, gets rid of nausea. The number of deaths through pot is zero. Unlike food that is in the top ten deaths with more than half food related deaths.
Looking at this whole situation marijuana if legalize could be one good alternative source for making our nation little bit better. Due to the medical benefits for patients to reduce nausea and help them get hungry. Another is how we can save more money when decriminalizing pot. Only because so many people are arrested for some type of charge with position of marijuana. Finally how it is really not that harmful unlike other drugs when consumed. ultimately why should something so beneficial not being used to it full potential.
I thank PRO for his reply. In this debate, PRO has not rebutted the claim that people will do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drug, and as a result people will do harder and more dangerous drugs then marijuana if it were legalized. In fact PRO responded with “that is true”. As CON, I have fulfilled my burden of proof, since people doing more harmful drugs in society is worse than people doing a less harmful drug in society, and therefore marijuana should remain illegal.
As stated earlier, PRO dropped my argument that people will turn to harder drugs for the sake of doing illegal activities.
Furthermore, I have rebutted his previous claim that drug prohibition increases crime, in which PRO has not responded.
In fact, PRO’s second round is exclusively new arguments. Which I shall address now.
Taxation of marijuana:
PRO states that legalization of marijuana will be beneficial to the government since it can gain tax revenues from it. However, there are a few problems with this theory:
a) Why pay excessive money for marijuana, if you can grow marijuana cheaply?
Marijuana is easy to grow, so if taxes are too high on marijuana, then a person can easily avoid the tax by growing the weed him or herself. Therefore, the amount of tax revenue that one can generate on marijuana is low.
b) Plenty of other ways to generate tax revenue or cut spending
The reason why Californians have a debt problem is obvious. It is not because they have exhausted their forms of generating tax revenue or that are no areas in the budget that can be cut. No, it is because people want many benefits from the government and do not want to pay for the benefits at the same time. That is the reason why California has a debt problem. Other states do not have the problem that California has, despite the fact that marijuana is illegal there:
Many other taxable items besides marijuana exist and other areas of the budget can be cut to solve the debt problem. However, stating that “taxing marijuana” is the solution is inane.
Crime and Economics:
First, PRO states that many people are incarcerated for marijuana use, and if marijuana were legal, then it would benefit the economy since less valuable resources would be used to incarcerate others.
PRO does not source his statistics, but from the data I found 41,000 people are incarcerated for marijuana charges while 2,266,800 people are incarcerated, so only 1.8% of people are actually incarcerated for marijuana, a very small percentage of the prison population. Furthermore, in my first round I stated that people will do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs, so the prison population should not change, since the ex-marijuana users will move onto
Furthermore, there is actually an economic benefit to illegalizing marijuana, since those who are caught doing marijuana are usually not charged with jail time, but insead charged with community service, which has a net benefit on society.
Medical Benefits of Marijuana:
Next, PRO states that marijuana has a medical benefit since it can help people with nausea. As a marijuana user myself, I find the idea that marijuana is useful medically is absurd. I’ve never felt that marijuana had any
pain-relieving or nausea-relieving remedies. In fact, going through a bad trip, I’ve had the opposite experiences. Furthermore, there are plenty of nausea reducing  and pain relieving medication out there. The medical benefits of marijuana have been exaggerated by advocates.
Next, PRO goes on to say that marijuana is not that harmful. As I stated earlier, I agree with that. However, PRO is not arguing whether marijuana is a harmful drug or not. PRO is arguing whether society benefits from the legalization or illegalization of the drug. My analysis above shows that the harmlessness of marijuana is a good thing, since teens will stick to an illegal drug of choice that is harmless rather than do an illegal drug that is harmful.
con you stated that people will do illegal drugs for the fact doing drugs. Your only taking in too account of actual drug addicts. In that case than yea drugs should be illegal in the fact you want to stop those people from committing crimes to get drugs anyway possible.
As con has stated, people do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs. I want to talk about the people in society who actually smoke marijuana just because they like pot. These are fully functioning citizen who understand what they need to do to be successful in their life. the only reason they smoke to help relive the stress without doing any true harm to their body. These people aren't drug addicts either, For these people marijuana can be the certain thing that can makes a person life stress free. AS con did state yes people do drug for the sake of drugs, those are the people that need to not be in society due to the fact they have no moral of any other life and only want to be high on drugs.
taxation of marijuana
con stated what if people just grew their own plant. I have to state that everyone will not want to spend that much time or money in growing pot. especially if the marijuana cant compare to the store bought once. I believe people would spend a little extra cash to buy marijuana knowing they would be much more affective. Another thing pot wouldn't just be smoked when legal they have a variety of things. For example brownie, cookie, and lollipops. a good amount of people would spend those extra dollars. I agree with con though that people would find another way to not pay taxes. IN general though you cant speak for every person in society, A sufficient amount will pay for all the items that will interest them.
economics of marijuana
con stated that their is a net benefit for the charges of marijuana while illegal. If legal though i would safely say that the nation would make more than charging people for it being illegal. In this society we live in now a great amount of people smoke marijuana. Due to that fact their would defiantly be a bigger net benefit from taxing weed.
Con has stated his reason from his feeling while smoking marijuana. Just like medication and everything a doctor can prescribe every body has a different reaction to a medication. In fact your outlook to other outlook on taking marijuana cant really give an accurate statement. Only because your talking about a personal experiences. As i stated before marijuana can generally help people with illnesses by relaxing. Another thing helping them eat like people with cancer even though they have no desire too. Next you stated having a bad trip but that can be a easy fix just by smoking not as strong pot so it doesn't have strong affect. Except for the reason of taking it to help a people who are sick in different way for whatever reason they need to use it for. Since its not addictive as Co stated and does not have as different type of chemicals it therefor have less side affect which are really slim.
Thanks to PRO for his swift response. PRO has again dropped the argument that people have incentives to do illegal drugs, and therefore if marijuana is illegal, people will just turn to harder drugs. I will continue to expand on this. Furthermore, PRO has dropped his previous arguments in the 1st round, that prohibition of drugs increases crime, which I debunked.
Furthermore, in the 2nd round, I have demonstrated that making marijuana illegal actually has a net economic benefit on society which I will expand upon.
People doing drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs
In the first round, I gave a detailed analysis of why people will do illegal activities for the sake of doing illegal activities. Teenagers have a huge incentive to commit crimes due to the high social status obtained and increased sexual attractiveness from the opposite sex. PRO has not responded to the analysis. Instead, he stated that “it is true”. Furthermore empirical evidence in my favor shows that legalizing marijuana causes people to turn to harder drugs. According the department of justice, following the legalization of marijuana in Netherland, heroin usage tripled supporting the theory that legalizing softer drugs will cause people to do harder drugs. Furthermore, as stated previously, the fact that the psychedelic drug salvia, which is just as effective as marijuana to obtain psychedelic experience is not as popular as marijuana is further proof that people do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs
Under no circumstance is my analysis just taking into account “drug addicts” and PRO has not responded to this.
Furthermore, PRO, without any evidence states that marijuana users are just people who need marijuana to relax and “know what they need to be successful in their life”. This is pure fantasy. People do marijuana for a variety. Furthermore, If it is just about “relieving stress” then we should expect older men who have to balance family and work to be the biggest marijuana users, but instead, the average age are teenagers. In fact, If we look at the age of marijuana users vs. the crime graph, the correlation is nearly identical further supporting my theory that people smoke marijuana because people gain high social status and sexual attractiveness for committing crimes at that age.
Taxation of marijuana
I’m not sure If Pro truly understood my argument. The more you tax an item, the more expensive it becomes and therefore demand for the product decreases as there are alternative substitutes. Taxing marijuana is inefficient, because at certain price levels, consumers will not buy marijuana and instead grow their own. It’s easy to make. Do you know people who grow their own fruits and vegetables even though they can just buy it at the store? Since people can just grow their own fruits and vegetables, the prices can’t be set too high since people will choose to grow them rather than buy them. Same goes with marijuana.
Furthermore, PRO has not responded to my argument that there are many alternative methods of taxing and/or cutting the budget. Unless PRO can show that California has exhausted all alternative taxing methods, this point is moot. I demonstrated that other states don’t have these problems.
Economics of marijuana:
PRO does not contend that there is a net benefit from sentencing marijuana users to community service. However, PRO states that this will be offset because one can generate revenue through the taxation of marijuana. However, as I stated above, this argument is moot because states haven’t exhausted all their methods for generating tax revenue. Rather the problems of California are due to the fact that people want government services without actually paying for them. PRO has not responded to this.
Furthermore, since mandatory community service cannot be enforced on law-abiding citizens, since it’s a form of indenture service; illegalizing marijuana has a net economic benefit to society.
Medical benefits of marijuana:
As stated previously, there are many types of medication that one can take for nausea. The previous link I showed demonstrated that there are 21 drugs out there that do that. So there is no reason why marijuana needs to be used to relieve nausea.
The idea that marijuana usage has no “side effects” is absurd, since as I mentioned, having a bad trip is a very bad side effect. During my first bad trip, I felt like I was going to die. Of course, my experience is not unique to my own, because in the above video, this person felt the same way. Furthermore, marijuana is linked to causing schizophrenia.
My experience should represent the average user’s experience, since my genetic makeup is 99.99% similar to other species of the human race.
The legalization of marijuana will have no net benefit on society and will in fact be harmful. The medical benefits of marijuana is nonexistent since it is riddled with side effects, unlikely to be effective, and there are many other more effective drugs that can be used instead of marijuana.
Furthermore, there is a net economic benefit from marijuana, since those fined with marijuana are sentenced to community service which benefits society. The taxation of marijuana is a moot point since other substances can be taxed and tax revenues have not been exhausted.
And of course, If marijuana is legalized, then people will just turn to harder drugs, which PRO has not disputed.
Con stated that people due illegal drugs for the sake of doing drugs. Then stating that if legalizing marijuana would happen, That it would cause people to do harder drugs for the sake of harder drugs. In general yea people do drugs but you cant associate those people with pot smokers. In America roughly every hundred marijuana smoker their is one cocaine user. Therefor people trying to state that using marijuana as a gate way drug when their is no real direct link. Although people do drugs for the sake of drug if marijuana was legal than their would be less dealers, since pot would be easier to obtain since legal. when that happens a lot of people do not have to go to the black market for drugs. Then the link to the harder drugs would be broken becuase people would not be looking for drugs in the street. Even though people do drugs for the sake the link to finding those drugs will be extremely harder becuase those dealers wont have marijuana to sell. Without the general product then they cant sell the harder drugs.
medical benefits of marijuana con stated that their is more way to cure nausea. Then talks about how he get bad trips from consumption of marijuana. Like all medicine their can be side effects. also everything can all be giving out in moderation. Another thing is medical marijuana does not have to be smoked for the medical befits. their are many other ways to take the marijuana. If taken the another way people wont get the full effects, therefor wont get any bad trips. Its even probably going to help cure many future illness. Next is that the prescription drugs and over the counter drugs can be a lot more lethal then marijuana. people have overdose on these medication.Not one person has actually overdose on medical marijuana.These medication also may not be able to actually cure the the problem. marijuana can be honestly one of the biggest revolutionary drug that can change the whole medical field. taxation of marijuana con state that marijuana get tax it going to get more expensive. The way the the tax would raise would depend on the state the weed is being sold in. our government works with a way of charging a certain price. In general state really charge the extra tax to the people.
If marijuana is legal it would help lower crime rates. Due to the fact that people can buy marijuana in stores. When that happen the connection between dealers and a good amount of people is broken. thus gives cops more free time to find those dealers that are still selling. Next is the medical benefits marijuana can actually give to this society. con state that it has no medical benefit when multiply people actually use it to save their life. only cause they do not need to take different medication that only restrains the certain illness. unlike marijuana that actually can help prevent certain illness like Fibromyalgia and their illness. another thing is how it can help the economy as seen on the you tube link above.
I thank PRO for his response.
People doing drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs
Pro states that in america “for every hundred marijuana smoker there is one cocaine user”. PRO is just proving my point. Illegalizing marijuana causes people to avoid doing harder drugs. Since marijuana is illegal and people want to do illegal activities, people choose to do marijuana over cocaine. As stated in the last round, legalizing marijuana in the Netherlands caused heroin smoking to increase.
I have never stated that marijuana is a “gateway” drug. In fact, my analysis is the opposite. People want to do illegal activities, so they choose to do marijuana instead of harder drugs.
I have already given the analysis for why people do illegal activities for the sake of doing activities in the previous rounds and showed evidence that supports the theory. PRO has not challenged the analysis or countered any of the evidence. Instead his response is to arguments that I never even said and in no way refute my claims. His response is just one massive red herring.
Prohibition of marijuana increases crime
As stated in round 1, his point about organized crimes are moot because he is not advocating for abolishing drugs. As long as other drugs and prostitution is illegal, there will be organized crime. Furthermore, dangerous organized crime results from addictive drugs. PRO has stated that marijuana is not an addictive drug.
Then PRO states that “the link between hard drugs would be broken” yet this is a direct contradiction from his previous statement that “marijuana as a gate way drug when their is no real direct link.” So which one is it? This also contradicts his statements made in the 1st round that prohibition of drugs does not work. Somehow prohibition does not work for alcohol, but works for hard drugs, provided that marijuana is illegal. What? I have agreed with PRO’s Round 1 analysis on prohibition and these arguments do not interfere with my arguments.
Medical benefits of marijuana
PRO has conceded that there are negative side effects from taking marijuana for medication. Furthermore, you don’t get “bad trips” because you smoke it instead of eat it, you get it because you are high on marijuana. So the idea that you can “eat it” instead of “smoke it” does not alleviate the problem of side effects. In fact, eating marijuana causes the duration to be longer, and because they are not “instant” and one can easily eat a lot, one can have a worse trip eating marijuana instead of smoking it.
PRO states that medicine for nausea can be lethal. I’d love for PRO to please explain to me how medicine for relieving nausea can be lethal because I have never heard of any deaths that have occurred from nausea medication.
So, as stated in the previous round, the medical benefits of marijuana are nonexistent and the side effects from marijuana are worse than traditional nausea medication, in which there are plenty of nausea reducing medication.
Taxation of marijuana
PRO again does not respond to my argument, and instead goes on to state how taxation of marijuana will occur. That’s nice, but it does not address my previous argument that the state has not exhausted its methods of taxations so the point is moot. As stated previous, the problem in California is not that they can’t find a way to generate revenue, it’s that people want government benefits without paying for it.
PRO has not addressed my arguments in previous rounds. This leads me to conclude that he concedes them. He has not responded to my analysis that people will do illegal drugs for the sake of doing illegal drugs, and legalizing marijuana will cause people to turn to harder drugs. This is a win for me because people doing harder drugs is worse for society then people doing softer drugs. As stated in the first round, I must demonstrate that making marijuana illegal will be more beneficial for society, which I have. I also demonstrated that charging marijuana users with community service benefits society as a whole, which PRO has not responded to.
thank you con for the respones
people doing drugs for the sake of doing illegale drugs.
con state that people do majruiana becuase its illegale and it isnt as hard as other drugs. Then he state that herion smokers started to increase which is actual a fasle statement. since 1983 to 2010 their was a study of herion addicts in the neatherlands. Their obsveration actually said it decreased about 30 percent due to a heroin-assisted treatment that was a trial now required for herion addicts. Since they havent had to worry about looking for people with marijuana since legale. There goverment was actually able to put more time and money towrds rehabltion towards other drugs. One more thing that people are more likely to get marijuana that is laest with something other than pot. Than would probaly have a chance of getting addict to harder drugs due to withdraws of the laest marijuana.
prohibition of marijuana
For cons theory as a flaw to it thought. Even if people due illegeale drugs for the sake of it. If marijuana was legal the police force can actually put in more time in stoping these other harder more danguose drugs that are being sold on the street. i sated majruiana isnt a gate way drug ethier but con didnt understand what i was trying to say about "the link between hard drugs would be broken". What the meaning of that was since dealers sold drugs other than just marijuana. Then they be able to sell to an imprasable clinet. due to the fact that the person has mostly brought pot from him before. So in the person mind he was able to have a sence of trust which is actually false not understanding his money is just profit. So if legaling marjuana people can just go to a store and buy it in a safer place unlike the streets. When i stated link between harder drugs would be broken, i ment that people wont know as many dealers due to the fact they can just go to stores and buy marijuana. instread of haveing a chance of getting sold a harder drug from the same dealer.
con stated that he personaly hasnt heard of anyone ever over doesing on over the counter nusea drugs. I just want to state that over 100 million peoples lives are taken away with just over doesing on Tylenol, Paracetamol. This is just one over the counter drug that killls people each day. Now i want to state like all these over the counter drugs marjiuana can be prescribed in does too. So if a patient takes marijuana that can help the rest of their lives they dont have to have strong type of cannibis. Actually they are most likely able to get mids. What is not even a fourth as strong as eating cookies or brownies. Another thing is not one person in the world has every died from smoking just marijuana.
For taxtion of marijuana
con states that people can just grow their marijuana in their house as easy as growing fruits and vegtables.
As i satted before thought not every person is able to due this due to time and other things on their schedual. A majiorty of the peole are going to go to stores to buy their mariuana. In genral the econmoy is going to make a bigger net profit than lost from taxting marijuana.
Con has stated that marijuana should stay illegale. The reason he state this is frist people doing drugs for the sake of doing drugs. honestly people do do drugs that are legal too. So i fmarijuana was lega the goverment would be able to worry more sbout dealers selling harder drugs. Even be able to put more time and money in rehabiltion towards those people doing harder drugs like the neatherlands. That goes the same for orginzed crimes too. the police foruce would be able to fouces more on these bigger dealers with the harder drugs. For the taxtion of marijuana he beilves that most people are just going to figure a way to beat the system in taxing marijuana. As i stated before not everyone has the time or the place to even grow marijuana. that menas the nation will make a profit in taxting marijuana. Marijuana it self has a compund (T.H.C). that can honestly help prevent alot of deiases and even cancer. Thi slittle canibbis can be very befincal too this nation if the goverment ever legalelized it.
I thank PRO for this debate.
It is noted that my argument of the economic benefit of community service has been dropped and I have mentioned it in previous rounds. This is another added benefit of the illegalization of marijuana which the voters should weight in to their decision of whether the legalization of marijuana has a net benefit to society or not.
People doing drugs for the sake of illegal drugs:
PRO has never disputed the reasoning behind my argument which has strong empirical evidence to back it up. PRO cites that heroin use has gone done from heroin-assistance treatment. However, that has nothing to do with marijuana legalization causing heroin use to double, since the two aren’t related. His findings in no way refute my claims.
Prohibition of marijuana:
PRO states that he does not believe in gateway drug theory, which is true but then goes on to state the theory that sounds a lot like gateway theory. I will debunk these claims.
Pro then goes on to state that if marijuana is illegal, then police officers can focus more resources on hard drugs rather than marijuana. Billions have been spent on the war on drugs and drugs are still around. So prohibition is clearly a failure, which I agree with. If prohibition does not work with marijuana or alcohol, why do we expect it to work on other drugs? Pumping money into police resources will fail, but the illegalization of marijuana has been more successful for stirring others to safer illegal drug usage.
Pro then goes onto state that if a person knows someone who sells marijuana then he/she has a link that he/she can buy harder drugs from. Yet, why do we assume that people will no longer want to buy hard drugs? What makes harder drugs so special even though prohibition of alcohol did not work? Does PRO really believe that it will become more difficult to find hard drugs? No. Finding drugs is easy.
As stated before, empirical evidence shows that people are more likely to do hard drugs If marijuana is legalized, from the source from the department of justice and the source above (source #1).
As discussed previously, there are side effects associated with marijuana. If we consider the indirect deaths caused through marijuana, from traffic accidents, the death rate from marijuana is higher than zero.
Furthermore, we don’t know the long-term side effects of marijuana use since there have not been any studies on them. Tobacco used to be considered safe but we all know the ill consequences of it. Current studies indicate the following negative side effects of marijuana:
-use is associated with impaired fetal growth
-development of mental disorders such as schizophrenia and depression
-cannabis associated respiratory disease 
PRO states that 100 million people have overdosed on Tylenol. This is obviously false, considering that 100 million people consist of about 1/3 of the US population. Looking through his source, 100 million people take Tylenol, and the amount of people that actually die from Tylenol is 100 people, a 1 in a million chance of someone dying from Tylenol use.
Still, even If one believes that one death is too many, there are still other drugs that one can take that have no deaths associated with it and very little side effects associated with it. Take for example, emetrol, one of the drugs listed as nausea reducing in my source. It has no reported deaths to it and very little side effects to it a much better alternative then medical marijuana.
Taxation of marijuana:
As stated before, this point is moot because the state has not exhausted its form of tax revenue which PRO has not disputed. Furthermore, I do not dispute that some people will choose to buy marijuana instead of grow it. However as prices increase demand decreases as people find substitutes. The easy substitute is to grow one’s own marijuana. Therefore, even the state tried to maximize the price of marijuana to generate revenue; it still would not generate enough revenue since as prices increase people will just choose to grown their own marijuana.
I urge my voters to vote CON. PRO has not demonstrated any benefits for the legalization of marijuana. While I have demonstrated how the legalization of marijuana in the Netherlands has doubled the use of heroin use. Remember, the point was not to demonstrate whether marijuana is a bad drug or not, but the effects of legalization or illegalization. I have provided ample evidence, both theoretical and empirical of how the illegalization of marijuana reduces hard drug usage. People doing harder drugs are worse for society then people doing soft drugs, and therefore I urge a vote for CON.