Ateneo VS

ATENEO VS.
UST debate
"The contentious documented benefits of medical marijuana cannot outweigh its adverse
effects to the government and society."
1. On a socio-political level: Legalization sends a wrong message to public, especially to the

youth, that marijuana is medically benevolent and not a harmful drug. The state cannot afford
to risk our society to the dangers of increased marijuana use by implying a stance that it is not
harmful.
2. Legalizing medical marijuana is not advantageous to the government.
1. Documented benefits are highly contentious at the moment and inconclusive.

2. It undermines law enforcement by forcing officers to distinguish medical users and
recreational users.
c. If anything increases "abuse" of marijuana, it would be the ban placed upon it. Think back to the
prohibition era. A blanket ban on alcohol resulted in underground speakeasies, organized crime (which
didn't exist in that form prior to the ban), and more reckless consumption. The same effect is seen
today, where younger kids (from whom alcohol is banned) engage in binge drinking and irresponsible
partying; whereas, in many European countries, children are introduced to alcohol at far earlier ages,
and are able to learn moderation. Allowing for the legalization of marijuana will do the same thing for
moderation as the 21st Amendment did in the case of alcohol. [http://www.cato.org...]
Contrary to the beliefs of those who advocate the legalization of marijuana, the current
balanced, restrictive, and bipartisan drug policies of the United States are working
reasonably well and they have contributed to reductions in the rate of marijuana use in
our nation.
The rate of current, past 30-day use of marijuana by Americans aged 12 and older in 1979
was 13.2 percent. In 2008 that figure stood at 6.1 percent. This 54-percent reduction in
marijuana use over that 29-year period is a major public health triumph, not a failure.
Marijuana is the most commonly abused illegal drug in the U.S. and around the world.
Those who support its legalization, for medical or for general use, fail to recognize that
the greatest costs of marijuana are not related to its prohibition; they are the costs
resulting from marijuana use itself.
There is a common misconception that the principle costs of marijuana use are those
related to the criminal justice system. This is a false premise. Caulkins & Sevigny (2005)
found that the percentage of people in prison for marijuana use is less than one half of
one percent (0.1-0.2 percent).
An encounter with the criminal justice system through apprehension for a drug-related
crime frequently can benefit the offender because the criminal justice system is often a
path to treatment.
More than a third, 37 percent, of treatment admissions reported in the Treatment Episode
Data Set, TEDS, collected from state-funded programs were referred through the criminal
justice system. Marijuana was an identified drug of abuse for 57 percent of the
individuals referred to treatment from the criminal justice system. The future of drug
policy is not a choice between using the criminal justice system or treatment. The more
appropriate goal is to get these two systems to work together more effectively to improve
both public safety and public health.
In the discussion of legalizing marijuana, a useful analogy can be made to

gambling. MacCoun & Reuter (2001) conclude that making the government a beneficiary
of legal gambling has encouraged the government to promote gambling, overlooking it as
a problem behavior. They point out that “the moral debasement of state government is a
phenomenon that only a few academics and preachers bemoan.”
Legalized gambling has not reduced illegal gambling in the United States; rather, it has
increased it. This is particularly evident in sports gambling, most of which is illegal.
Legal gambling is taxed and regulated and illegal gambling is not. Legal gambling sets
the stage for illegal gambling just the way legal marijuana would set the stage for illegal
marijuana trafficking.
The gambling precedent suggests strongly that illegal drug suppliers would thrive by
selling more potent marijuana products outside of the legal channels that would be taxed
and otherwise restricted. If marijuana were legalized, the only way to eliminate its illegal
trade, which is modest in comparison to that of cocaine, would be to sell marijuana
untaxed and unregulated to any willing buyer.
Marijuana is currently the leading cause of substance dependence other than

alcohol in the U.S. In 2008, marijuana use accounted for 4.2 million of the 7 million
people aged 12 or older classified with dependence on or abuse of an illicit drug.
This means that about two thirds of Americans suffering from any substance use
disorder are suffering from marijuana abuse or marijuana dependence. (2nd)
If the U.S. were to legalize marijuana, the number of marijuana users would increase.
Today there are 15.2 million current marijuana users in comparison to 129 million
alcohol users and 70.9 million tobacco users. Though the number of marijuana users
might not quickly climb to the current numbers for alcohol and tobacco, if marijuana was
legalized, the increase in users would be both large and rapid with subsequent increases
in addiction.
Important lessons can be learned from those two widely-used legal drugs. While both
alcohol and tobacco are taxed and regulated, the tax benefits to the public are vastly
overshadowed by the adverse consequences of their use.
Alcohol-related costs total over $185 billion while federal and states collected an
estimated $14.5 billion in tax revenue; similarly, tobacco use costs over $200 billion but
only $25 billion is collected in taxes. These figures show that the costs of legal alcohol
are more than 12 times the total tax revenue collected, and that the costs of legal tobacco
are about 8 times the tax revenue collected. This is an economically disastrous tradeoff.
The costs of legalizing marijuana would not only be financial. New marijuana users
would not be limited to adults if marijuana were legalized, just as regulations on alcohol
and tobacco do not prevent use by youth. Rapidly accumulating new research shows that
marijuana use is associated with increases in a range of serious mental and physical
problems. Lack of public understanding on this relationship is undermining prevention
efforts and adversely affecting the nation’s youth and their families.
Drug-impaired driving will also increase if marijuana is legalized. Marijuana is already a

significant causal factor in highway crashes, injuries and deaths. In a recent national
roadside survey of weekend nighttime drivers, 8.6 percent tested positive for marijuana or
its metabolites, nearly four times the percentage of drivers with a blood alcohol
concentration (BAC) of .08 g/dL (2.2 percent).
In another study of seriously injured drivers admitted to a Level-1 shock trauma center,
more than a quarter of all drivers (26.9 percent) tested positive for marijuana. In a study
of fatally injured drivers in Washington State, 12.7 percent tested positive for marijuana.
These studies demonstrate the high prevalence of drugged driving as a result of marijuana
use.
Many people who want to legalize marijuana are passionate about their perception of the
alleged failures of policies aimed at reducing marijuana use but those legalization
proponents seldom—if ever—describe their own plan for taxing and regulating marijuana
as a legal drug. There is a reason for this imbalance; they cannot come up with a credible
plan for legalization that could deliver on their exaggerated claims for this new policy.
Future drug policies must be smarter and more effective in curbing the demand for illegal
drugs including marijuana. Smarter-drug prevention policies should start by reducing
illegal drug use among the 5 million criminal offenders who are on parole and probation
in the U.S. They are among the nation’s heaviest and most problem-generating illegal
drug users.
Monitoring programs that are linked to swift and certain, but not severe, consequences for
any drug use have demonstrated outstanding results including lower recidivism and lower
rates of incarceration. New policies to curb drugged driving will not only make our roads
and highways safer and provide an important new path to treatment, but they will also
reduce illegal drug use.
Reducing marijuana use is essential to improving the nation’s health, education, and
productivity. New policies can greatly improve current performance of prevention
strategies which, far from failing, has protected millions of people from the many adverse
effects of marijuana use.
Since legalization of marijuana for medical or general use would increase marijuana use
rather than reduce it and would lead to increased rates of addiction to marijuana among
youth and adults, legalizing marijuana is not a smart public health or public safety
strategy for any state or for our nation.

Ateneo VS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ateneo VS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ateneo VS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ATENEO VS.

1. On a socio-political level: Legalization sends a wrong message to public, especially to the

1. Documented benefits are highly contentious at the moment and inconclusive.

In the discussion of legalizing marijuana, a useful analogy can be made to

Marijuana is currently the leading cause of substance dependence other than

Drug-impaired driving will also increase if marijuana is legalized. Marijuana is already a

You might also like