Question

there is a section that introduces the topic, then two authors write about each side of the argument, presenting both sides, and then a conclusion.

Option 2: Should Laws Prohibiting Marijuana Use Be Relaxed? Article: ShouldMarijuanaLawBeRelaxed.pdf a Questions: 1. Historically, what were the arguments used against marijuana use? Which arguments lacked validity and have not been supported? Which arguments do you consider valid? 2. How much do a drug's legal status and criminal penalties associated with its possession and use influence whether someone will or will not use a drug? 3. If an easing of the laws resulted in much abuse and physical or psychological problems, how easy would it be to return to a more restrictive marijuana laws? 4. Is marijuana a "gateway drug"? In other words, does early marijuana use increase the chance that someone will move on to using "harder" drugs like cocaine or heroin? What logic or information supports or refutes this classification of marijuana as a "gateway drug"? 5. After reading both positions, which one do you agree with? Why? Which one had a strongly argument using evidence?

Answer 1

1. Those in opposition to marijuana use argue that it would have adverse effects on the growth and social developments of the young adults in the society, if they see their parents indulging in smoking marijuana. They argue that marijuana acts as a gateway drug to many of the more dangerous drugs as the need for a different high is soon not satisfied by marijuana. Therefore, people support the restrictions that are in effect currently and also demand law enforcement to curtail the prevalent illegal economics of marijuana.
2. To those who are involved in the consumption of drugs, studies have shown that whether or not the consumption of the drug is legal does not hold much importance. Studies have also shown that a substance being illegal and widely available could attract more recipients than what it would have normally garnered. Therefore it has a counter effect on the whole objective.
3. If the laws are eased then it is not going to be very easy to put the restrictions back again. This is because a large part of the industry and services is going to get involved in the regularized trade and purchase of the drugs and putting the restrictions back again would mean thousands of jobs. Also, any kind of restriction would bring a strong anti-government protest and therefore no government is going to be very keen to it.
4. It has been bought to notice by several studies that marijuana can act as a gateway drug. People who regularly consume marijuana, sooner than later, get bored by the kind of effect that the drug has on their body and hence they seek something different. This can lead them to trying out some of the more hard drugs that have very different effects on the body but are also severely harmful to the body.
5. In such a highly debated topic, it always becomes difficult to come to the terms of all the arguments of one of the sides. But, one has to agree that both the sides have got valid points on how they view the economics relating to marijuana. However, to bring the illegal economics of marijuana to a conclusion should be the primary goal of law enforcement right now. However, the argument that a child would copy the behaviour of his parents is anecdotal and is difficult to back by reseach. But, the argument that it can act as gateway drugs has valid substance.
   The argument that illegal economics relating to the marijuana holds the most ground.

Thanks
Hope I could help you
Please upvote the answer to show your support
Keep studying and learning