Argumentation in legalization debate

Tyler Buys

I am writing because I have a request to anyone who does not support the legalization of marijuana. Being a philosopher as well as a man of science, I make sure that most if not all of my decisions are based on logical facts from reputable sources. In the marijuana debates, I have read plenty of articles that contend that marijuana has no negative side effects beyond a temporary negative effect on memory and motor function. On the other side of the debate, however, I continue to hear reports of how marijuana is physically and culturally dangerous. I simply ask that if these people wish for me to believe their claims that they provide the same logical scientific evidence that proponents of marijuana legalization seem to be able to give at the drop of a hat. I also ask for someone to explain why Tom PrichardâÄôs belief that âÄúmarijuana is a drug which has dangerous consequences for societyâÄù has any grounding in reality, and why it is a more logically sound argument than the one given by Abraham Lincoln that âÄúprohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a manâÄôs appetite by legislation and making crimes out of things that are not crimes.âÄù Coupled with the argument that because marijuana is illegal, it puts the buyer of marijuana in contact with people that sell illegal things such as crack, heroin, cocaine, meth and LSD, I ask for only one reputable scientific source to support this. Tyler Buys University undergraduate student