Legalization of Marijuana

While advocates of the legalization of marijuana use insist that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol, foes of the idea dispute that either of these toxic recreational devices can be easily abused. Even though there are extensive pros and cons to the corroboration of the use of marijuana, 21 states (including Washington, D.C.) have agreed to the use of medical marijuana. This raises the question that both critics and defenders struggle to answer: If marijuana can be used for medical purposes, why shouldn’t it be used in a recreational setting? According to the Huffington Post, “If we were making laws for a planet whose population had never experienced either marijuana or alcohol, and we had to choose one of the two drugs to make available, there would be a strong case for choosing marijuana, which has lower organic toxicity, lower addictive risk, and a much weaker link with accidents and violence.”
In recent discussions of the legalization of weed, a controversial issue has been whether the drug is a risk at all. If a person over the age of 21 is legally able to consume an alcoholic beverage, why shouldn’t they be able to smoke marijuana as well? Detractors of the concept call attention to the argument that control of marijuana would be excessively complicated. Backers acknowledge this case, but verify the thought that crime rates would decrease dramatically, removing the need for much control at all.
Another complaint of the attackers is the option for workers to be under the influence of marijuana while on the job. But, fans endorse that those same workers could be under the influence of a much more dangerous pass-time, such as alcohol. The same rules which apply in the work place could easily be extended to the frivolous use of weed.
According to the authors of Legalization of Marijuana: An Overview, “A 2006 public policy suggested that marijuana is the United States largest cash crop by a significant margin. A similar study carried out by a