A Pages:4 Words:878
This is just a sample.
To get a unique essay
Hire Writer
Type of paper: Essay
University/College: University of Chicago
Download: .pdf, .docx, .epub, .txt

A limited time offer!

Get custom essay sample written according to your requirements

Urgent 3h delivery guaranteed

Order Now

Marijuana Debate

Erica Del Vigna Coms 2 Negative Outline Proposition: The state of California should legalize marijuana. I. Introduction Thesis: Though I agree that marijuana should be put into a controlled environment, I believe it should not be legalized due to its poor health attributes, and its negative influence towards the youth and drug users.

We will write a custom essay sample on Marijuana Debate specifically for you
for only $13.90/page
Order Now

Preview: I will be explaining today why the affirmatives plan does will not work as a sufficient plan in California. I will start by refuting his claims that marijuana is not a gateway drug. I will also explain the future harm that legalizing this drug could do to the youth of our state.

Finally, I will connect the link on drug users to criminals. Overall this drug does not benefit our future generations socially or for their health. According to Scripps Alcohol and Treatment Center in California, “we have yet to see a patient come through here who doesn’t attribute his addiction to having started with marijuana as a gateway drug”. II. Body A. Ills and significance refutation 1. The affirmative claims that marijuana is not a gateway drug, which is the farthest from the truth. Most people who are in a treatment center started off by occasionally using marijuana.

As I stated in my previous quote from the Scripps alcohol center, most addicts blame their addiction habits to starting with a gateway drug like marijuana or alcohol. The clinician who was interviewed stated that society realizes the real dangers of marijuana as a gateway drug. Even though in 1996, medical marijuana was passed by California voters with Proposition 215 by a 56 % passing rate; in 2010, Proposition 19 failed because California voters did not want to legalize marijuana, as stated in the Christian Science Monitor dated May 2012. . The affirmative argues that law enforcement should spend their days fighting something more important than drug users. I strongly disagree with this because of the evidence showing that drug users lead to harsher crimes. Allowing people to use drugs is telling the youth of California that it is okay to smoke weed. This could potentially turn otherwise respectable children into drug using, criminal adults. In the article by the American Academy of Pediatrics, “Legalization of Marijuana: Potential impact on youth” in 2004, the doctors state that legalization of marijuana would have a negative effect on youth because in would decrease the adolescents’ perceptions of risk and increase their exposure to the drug. In comparison to a Dutch study from 1984 to 1992, decriminalization increases marijuana use by adolescents because making marijuana legal makes it available. American manufacturers of alcohol and tobacco market their products to young people and marijuana would be the same.

Marketing research shows that if only 1% of 15-19 year old Americans began using marijuana, there would be approximately 190,000 new users. B. Cure refutation 1. —The affirmative’s plan will not work for multiple reasons. Although some may use the drug for health benefits, it will cause more problems to society than help. The Office of National Drug Control Policy director, John Walters states that Marijuana damages the brain, heart, lungs, immune system and contains cancer-causing compounds. It also impairs learning, memory, perception and judgment which are connected to car accidents and workplace accidents.

It should not be legalized because it is too dangerous and causes severe health problems. In the article by Taxman and Thanner, “Risk, Need, and Responsivity” in Crime & Delinquency dated 2006, the authors agree that marijuana should not be legalized because 20% of the state drug offenders reported involvement with firearms and 24% of the state drug offenders had prior convictions for violent offenses.. Repeat offenders connected with weapons and violent offenses incur high costs; but keeping these criminals off of the streets is worth it. C. Cost-Benefits –There are 4 main disadvantages that could take place if we legalize marijuana: 1. Drug users throughout the general population may rise. 2. Many more people will be using firearm and could demonstrate violent behavior 3. More health damage than good could affect millions of people either as users or from second hand smoke 4. Moral and ethical values could be put in jeopardy III. Conclusion 1. California currently only allows medical marijuana users to legally purchase marijuana. If we allow all citizens to have access to this drug, we could potentially lead California down a very bad path.

We would see far more crimes and cases of drug addiction. We do not want the future leaders and adults to think that it is politically or socially correct to use this drug. 2. It is clear from previous California elections that California’s people do not want the law to be changed. In order to keep the state safe, and healthy, it is crucial that marijuana is not legalized for recreational use. Works Cited 1. Joffe, Alain and W. Samuel Yancy. “Legislation of Marijuana: Potential Impact on Youth. ” American Academy of Pediatrics. 113:6 (2004): 632-638. 2. Taxman, Faye and Meridith Thanner. Risk, Need and Responsivity. ” Crime & Delinquency. 52:28 (2005): 28-51. 3. Weil, A. T. et. al. “Clinical and Psychological Effects of Marijuana in Man. ” Science Magazine. 162:1234 (1968): 129-132. 4. Benson, John et. al. “Medical Marijuana – should marijuana be a medical option? ” Neighborhood Link National Network. Retrieved from www. neighborhoodlink. com/article/Community/Medical_Marijuana. 5. Khatapoush, S. and D. Halifors. “Sending the Wrong Message: Did Medical Marijuana Legalization in California Change Attitudes about use of Marijuana? ” Journal of Drug Issues. 34:4 (2012): 751-770.