Jan Erik Student
1st Writing Assignment
(Marijuana Legalization)
6/1/11

Pro-1: Many, many jobs would be created. Imagine how many people are employed in the tobacco industry. It would take people to grow it, harvest it, sell it, package it, advertise it and people to manage and supervise those jobs. Basic economics. (“G-prime” http://www.ubersite.com/m/65607)
G-prime, who supports legalization, says that legalization would bring into being a large number of new jobs. He compares a future marijuana industry with the present tobacco industry, and points out that legal marijuana producers would need and employ growers, harvesters, packagers and advertisers, as well as managers and supervisors for those employees.

Pro-2: The government could make lots of money on taxing it. Those buggers have always got their hands in somebody's pockets; why not stick them in the pockets of potheads?(“G-prime” http://www.ubersite.com/m/65607)
G-prime, who supports legalization, says that government already taxes lots and lots of people. There is no reason government cannot also tax legal marijuana sales. This would result in greatly increased tax revenues.

Pro-3: The price of weed would drop significantly. It would become more common, being legal, and although the demand would rise, it wouldn't rise enough to compensate for the rising offer. The price would drop to about 50$ an ounce. (Canadian reckoning) (“G-prime” http://www.ubersite.com/m/65607)
G-prime, who supports legalization, says something like: Duuuude! Herb would get much cheaper. It would be everywhere, man! Sure, more people would turn on, you know, but even more dudes would start growing, y’dig? You’d be able to get an ounce for fifty of those loonies. That’d be sweet, man! (Although not in those words.)
Con-1:  Do we think that maybe the best use of a person's time is indeed to smoke dope? If not, then we should ban it. I don't think many old people would say, " One thing I regret in life is not spending enough time and money smoking dope." In fact, I would expect the opposite. (Kieran Walsh. http://www.rasmusen.org/x/archives/000166.html.)
Kieran Walsh, who opposes legalization, says that if the general population decides that smoking marijuana is not the best use of a person’s time, then the state should ban marijuana use. Walsh also says that he expects that no-one, at the end of his life, would regret not spending more time and money smoking marijuana.

Con-2
 If you had a thirty-year-old son who wanted to smoke marijuana daily, would you be pleased if he were given the legal right to do so?  (Kieran Walsh. http://www.rasmusen.org/x/archives/000166.html.)
Kieran Walsh, who opposes legalization, asks the reader to imagine giving the legal right to smoke marijuana to  a thirty-year-old son of the reader who already smokes dope every day.  

Con-3
Marijuana is an addictive drug with significant health consequences to its users and others. Many harmful short-term and long-term problems have been documented with its use: (http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/marijuana.html)
The Drug Enforcement Administration, which opposes legalization, claims that marijuana is addictive, and that it’s use has several noticible or serious negative health effects in both the short and the long term