By the year 1920, the eighteenth amendment banning the manufacture and distribution of alcohol, commonly known as the Prohibition, was enforced in America. The law was passed with the hopes of lowering crime rates and strengthening family values. In the year 1933, the Prohibition was repealed. During the decade where it was enforced, it was never actually illegal to consume alcohol; many people bought illegal alcohol that was consequently of poor quality and made individuals become ill. Roughly 1,000 Americans died each year of the Prohibition. Additionally, Prohibition worsened the economy because jobs were lost from breweries closing, and the government lost about 11 billion dollars in tax revenue and used 300 million to enforce ban. The law was idealized to follow morals and help people, but it ended up hurting citizens more than anything.

Today alcohol is legal for adults age 21 and older. Though, another prohibition is forced upon America; the ban against recreational marijuana. Recreational marijuana is marijuana that is smoked for the simple pleasure of smoking it; it is known more commonly by names such as pot and weed. Currently marijuana that is smoked as part of medical treatment with prescriptions is legal, but smoking it just because someone wants to is not allowed. This prohibition, just as that on alcohol during the 20’s, is a disadvantage to the U.S. and should be repealed.

If marijuana was legalized there would be many benefits for the country. The economy would receive a boost from the taxation of the drug. Crime rates would drop because the illegal activity would no longer exist. Additionally, this drug is no more dangerous than the already legal and regulated tobacco. Common misconceptions about the drug currently prohibit its endorsement from the government, but two states, Colorado and Washington, have already pushed through state wide laws making recreational use acceptable and have reaped the rich rewards from doing so. Morally speaking, it is perfectly acceptable to legalize all forms of marijuana because the consequences would be beneficial for the country as a whole and help many more people than it would hurt.

No question is to be had about the poor state of this country’s economy. Legalizing marijuana would not fix everything entirely, but it would help. By legalizing this drug, the U.S could tax it and profit off of it. In an article published by the Drug Policy Alliance, it states, “[The] underground market for marijuana, [is] estimated to be worth $30 billion or more in the U.S. This immense market is running completely untaxed” (3). If we legalized and taxed this drug, that would mean nearly 30 billion dollars into the pockets of the government. Making a drug legal just to tax it and profit from it is not a new concept for this country, and the taxation of it would not be a whole new system; it would be taxed just the same as other drugs already are. In the same article it states, “Revenue from taxation of marijuana sales could reach up to $8.7 billion per year if taxed like alcohol or tobacco –on top of billions in saved law enforcement resources” (Drug Policy Alliance 4). If legalized, we would no longer have to dish out thousands of dollars to law enforcement making arrests based on minor possession or use charges. If taxing the drug is so simple why has it not already been done? Legalizing marijuana is ethically right to do because it will help boost the country’s economy, and when the economy of a country is healthy, its citizens will be healthy and better off as well.

Some disagree with this train of thought, claiming that if the U.S. did legalize pot the expenses to keep it regulated would outweigh any and all tax revenue (Office of National Drug Control Policy 5). However, one can use the legalization of pot in Colorado as a case study to prove these people wrong. In a review of Colorado’s economy since legalization it states that “On January 1, 2014, legal marijuana sales began in Colorado –with more than $5 million sales generated in the first week alone” (Drug Policy Alliance 4). By taxing the drug, Colorado had a surge of income and the expenses must not have been too large in comparison because, “tax revenue from retail marijuana sales amounted to $40.9 million between January 2014 and October 2014” (“Decriminalization and Legalization” 2). Ten months of increased income for Colorado’s government. If the expenses truly outweighed the tax revenue as suggested, the profits would be negative rather than in the million range as seen here. Pure money profit is not the only benfit taking place either, over 16,000 new jobs were created and unemployment rates are at a six year low. No matter how one looks at the economic system, legalizing pot helped boost it. Excluding the minor expenses towards the new marijuana market, the profits off of it are being put to best use. As stated in the recent review of Colorado since legalization, “The state awarded the first $975,000 in grants to Colorado schools to be used to hire health professionals. The funds help fill a critical gap in Colorado school districts” (“Decriminalization and Legalization” 1). This shows an excellent use of the new revenue that without legalizing pot could not have been filled. Think about all the ways the U.S. could use the extra money to help better the country. Economically speaking, legalizing marijuana is acceptable because of all the ways the extra money could be used to help various people; which also means it aligns with the principle of a country doing all it can to help its citizens thus making it morally compatible.

Another way legalizing marijuana would help communities is with the fact that crime rates would drop. A current analysis of arrests in the U.S. done by the Drug Policy Alliance shows, “In 2012, there were 749,825 marijuana arrests in the U.S. –nearly half of all drug arrests. More than 87% were for simple possession, not sale or manufacture” (1). By simply legalizing weed, these arrests would obviously stop and therefore keeping our jails less crowded and police officers free to arrest those who commit more serious crimes. By getting rid of the clutter that minor weed charges cause, more serious violence rates would also drop because those individuals would be behind bars. Illegal drugs, currently including weed, are the drug cartel’s business. Illegal drugs cause violence because when there is a dispute between sellers and/or users, courts and officials are out of the question and violence becomes the only answer. Director of undergraduate studies in economics at Harvard University Jeffery Miron states that “Prohibition drives drug markets underground, thereby generating violence and corruption. Participants in black markets cannot resolve their disputes with courts and lawyers, so they resort to violence instead” (Miron 2). By legalizing weed, the U.S. would be taking it out of the cartel’s hands and any and all problems occurring between people would be settled in a courtroom with a judge, not on the streets with a gun. Morally speaking, lives would be saved and less and less cartel violence would happen, so legalizing this drug is the right thing to do.

Naysayers of weed legalization claim that the drug cartel would still have drugs such as cocaine or heroin that there would be no difference in crime rates, or that because so many people are doing this toxin, they would be more aggressive and cause more violence. Those who say this lack a fundamental understanding of what weed is. It is not an aggressive drug. It does not cause people to become violent. Referring back to Colorado as a case study, “Arrests for cultivating and distributing marijuana have also dropped by more than 90%... Violent crime went down by 2.2% in the first 11 months of 2014… In the same period, burglaries in Denver decreased by 9.5%” (“Decriminalization and Legalization” 1). Because weed is legal, people quit growing and maintaining it themselves and buy from a legal, licensed distributor; leading to the decrease in arrests. Secondly, overall crime dropped; if the theories that weed causes violence were true, Colorado would be seen with a rise in crime rates, not a the steady drop that is proven here. While it the cartel will still have other drugs, legalizing weed will give them one less to run on and just that many more lives saved from violence. Overall, legalizing this dug will not raise crime rates, but rather help lower them, thus legalization is morally acceptable because it will not hurt those who are involved. 

Too many people believe that pot is severely destructive to one’s health. In reality, smoking pot has about the same long lasting effects as smoking tobacco and the side effects that are different are temporary. To prove that it is not as dangerous as believed, a graph of the “Annual Causes of Death in the United States” updated as of May 16, 2007 is shown. 
 
No one has ever died of a marijuana overdose. Aside from that, there is a surplus of variables resulting in how any given person would react to smoking marijuana. Generally, a person who smokes pot will have the same chronic coughing and excessive phlegm production as someone who smokes tobacco. Equally, risk of developing lung cancer is about the same between both smokers (“Cannabis Dangers” 1). Differing side effects would be pot’s tendency to produce paranoia and anxiety. Confused and afraid, those who experience these effects are statistically shown to avoid a lifestyle of smoking pot repeatedly (“Cannabis Dangers” 1). In other words, people who try pot are shown to quickly quit it compared to those who smoke tobacco and use it for the rest of their life. As shown in a recent study of pot smokers and why they ceased smoking the drug, “30% gave ‘negative experiences’ as their reason for permanently quitting cannabis” (“Cannabis Dangers” 1). Basing an argument off of this fact, pot would be actually safer than tobacco because smokers will only go through a phase of using this drug and thus save their remaining health after they quit.

Simple-minded and ill-advised Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Lee Brown states in a public address that “Each of us must make clear that the only worthwhile drug message is a “no use” message. We cannot give mixed messages and come down hard on some drugs and soft-pedal the dangers of others. Marijuana is a dangerous and harmful drug” (qtd. in Brown 1). First off, seeing as how marijuana is a drug, obviously there are going to be some health issues associated with smoking it. However, where is this level of concern for everyone’s health when it comes to alcohol and tobacco? How can there be such a huge fight against marijuana, yet not against those substances proven to cause cancer, addiction, and liver damage? Instead of fighting to keep marijuana illegal, why is there no fight to make tobacco and alcohol illegal as well? Arguments against marijuana legalization are based in hypocrisy, therefore the entire dilemma of whether it is morally permissible or not is already won. If tobacco and alcohol with their side effects and health risks are legal in today’s society, then legalizing marijuana with equal or lesser dangers is the right thing to do.

Despite another popular opinion, weed is not an addictive drug. In order to understand this, one must first understand what exactly happens to the body when high on weed. As explained by two graduates of the University of Guelph in Biological Science, Mitchell Moffit and Gregory Brown on their science YouTube channel, cannabis has a common chemical structure to what is already naturally produced in our brains: cannabinoids. These cannabinoids make neurons transmit information at a faster rate than usual. Stimulating the brain and releasing excessive amounts of the feel-good chemicals dopamine and norepinephrine, the body’s pain sensors are lowered and a euphoric state takes over (Moffit and Brown). The body cannot become addicted to this substance, yet the mind can become addicted to the reaction from it.

Disagreeing people would say that “People who use high doses of cannabis frequently over many years, and those who start using in adolescence, may become addicted to the drug” (qtd. in Almendrala). Addiction is a misused word and the concept used in the same way as in this quote is true quote is true for any and all substances: pot, alcohol, cake. If one has it enough times they will start to crave it and become attached, either physically or psychologically. Key word here: attached, not addicted. As explained by Arkowitz and Lilenfeld in their article, the real word used by specialists for those few who do find themselves seriously, physiologically in need of smoking weed regularly is “dependence.” They state, “Of those who had tried marijuana at least once, about 9 percent eventually fit a diagnosis of cannabis dependence… alcohol was 15 percent… cocaine, 17 percent… heroin, 23 percent; and for nicotine, 32 percent” (Arkowitz and Lilenfeld 4). A small amount of users find themselves in a position that would require rehab in order to stop using marijuana, and in comparison to other harmful substances marijuana still has the lowest rate of these cases. Once again proving that keeping marijuana illegal is the wrong thing to do because those who use it rarely develop problems with it; it is a near harmless substance.

Claims have been made about marijuana being what is commonly referred to as a “gateway drug.” While no scientific research has ever proven that gateway drugs exist, it goes off the principle that if someone uses a soft drug they will climb the ladder and begin using harder and harder drugs. In example, smoking weed for a period of time means that someday one will jump to doing heroin. Plenty of people do hard drugs without having smoked weed first, so this is not a concrete argument. Additionally, a valid argument against this claim is made by Hal Arkowitz and Scott Lilienfeld, “Individuals often smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol before they latch on to marijuana. Should we also be asking whether nicotine and alcohol are gateway drugs?” (Arkowitz and Lilienfeld 4). Either any and all drugs should be classified as gateway drugs, thus rendering the term useless, or we should look for the real, psychological reason as to why some users jump to using harder and harder drugs. Because there is little evidence supporting that gateway drugs exist as any substance, marijuana legalization is an acceptable and safe to happen.

Medical marijuana is already legal in all 50 states of America. It has been proven to be beneficial for patients during treatment of illnesses such as AIDS, Hepatitis C, Glaucoma, Cancer, Multiple Sclerosis, Epilepsy, and chronic pain (Marijuana Policy Project 2). Scientists Arkowitz and Lilienfeld say, “In glaucoma patients, it can reduce the dangerously high eye pressure that can lead to vision loss…pot can provide relief from chronic pain, reduce nausea and vomiting from cancer chemotherapy” (5). No one can dispute legalization of medical marijuana because of all the benefits it has. On the same thought, recreational marijuana does not hurt anyone, so why can that not be legalized too? Think about the man who has cancer who is immediately prescribed marijuana to help with the pain. Now, think about the man who suffers from chronic depression; marijuana has not been scientifically backed as a treatment. Nevertheless, it makes sense that smoking marijuana could relieve some of the pain associated with that disease. By legalizing recreational marijuana, those who need it for medical reasons yet are not prescribed it could still get the pain relief they need. It is morally unacceptable to allow some people access to this drug without allowing others access when their needs lie in the same principle of pain.

Marijuana smokers tend to get the stereotype of a “pot-head” thrown onto them. When most people think about legalizing marijuana and what that world would look like, they think of That 70’s Show where the stereotypical pot smoker is an unclean hippie, and the kids light up in basements. Living in this fictional world, one of the six leading characters at any point in time is most likely to have pot in his or her possession. Fear of this make-believe world becoming our reality is understandable, yet completely hasty.
A recent study proves that “43 percent of U.S. adults aged 18 or older have tried marijuana at least once” (Arkowitz and Lilienfeld 2). This equates to hundreds of adults having used this drug; thus implying that the demand for such a market of the legal drug would be vast. Already explained is the lack of significant health hazards this drug possesses, and since the demand is this high why is there even a question of legalizing pot or not?

In all actuality, real dangers of marijuana are because of the prohibition. Due to the current pot market being underground, many are becoming ill or dying not from the drug itself, but rather from contaminates. As explained in a current article, “Prohibition makes quality control difficult, so the incidence of accidental poisonings and overdoses is higher than in a legal market” (Miron 2). While no one ever has, or can, overdose on pot, the argument here is with those contaminates attached or mixed in with what the person is smoking. Legalizing marijuana and forcing it to go through FDA regulations would eliminate this deadly dilemma.

Finally, unlike That 70’s Show where any under aged child could get their hands on weed, if legalized there would be an age limit, regulations, permits, and every other safety precaution involved. Looking back at the example of Colorado, who has not had legal marijuana for two years, and Washington State, also roughly two years since legalization, one can clearly see what rules a society with a marijuana market would look like. In an article put out by the Drug Policy Alliance, Colorado and Washington have permitted the sale, cultivation, and distribution of marijuana for adults 21 and older; allowing those who choose to participate be under the same basic laws which apply to alcohol. Further proving that legalizing recreational marijuana does not mean that the whole country would have a free-for-all with it, there would be plenty of rules and regulations to keep every individual safe. Legalizing marijuana is ethically right to do because of the safety precautions that would be taken to keep it out of the wrong hands and keep anyone from getting hurt.

The prohibition on alcohol was quickly repealed after the negative effects of the ban were realized. Why is this not yet the case for marijuana? By keeping marijuana illegal, the United States is losing hundreds of dollars funding the enforcement of said ban, not to mention missing out on an opportunity for tax revenue. Marijuana itself is not the cause of violence; it is the illegal, underground business that causes violence, and legalizing pot would take it out of the cartel’s hands thus eliminating this problem. Disputes against legalizing the drug seem to stem from misconceptions about it. Pot has never actually been proven to be a “gateway” drug, it causes approximately the same health hazards as smoking tobacco, and it could be regulated under the same laws and corporations that alcohol and tobacco already are. Possible positives far outweigh any and all consequences of legalizing this drug, and said consequences are widely known. Using any drug is not healthy and has its own set of dangers, yet out of all illegal substances marijuana has the least possibility of harm and most potential for being used to benefit the country. With all this in mind, it is morally acceptable to legalize all marijuana because of the beneficial consequences it would have on the country. Societal ethics and morals of today reflect a motto of help everyone, marijuana could do just that.