Marijuana has negative health effects

The argument

The case against recreational legalisation rests on what the substance does to the people who use it. Marijuana use has been linked to a range of negative health outcomes, and they are not confined to one part of the body: mental health issues, cardiovascular problems and lung problems all appear in the record. The breadth matters, because it means the risk is not a single identified hazard that might be designed around but a set of effects reaching several areas of health at once. Dependence compounds the harm. Roughly one in ten users becomes addicted, which is a high enough rate that it cannot be treated as an unlucky minority outcome. It also changes the nature of the choice involved: a person who has become dependent is no longer deciding freely on each occasion whether the risk is worth taking, and the harms then accumulate over a period in which stopping has become difficult. A product with that profile does not fit the model of an informed adult accepting a known risk once. What follows is a conclusion about the state's role. Legalising a substance is not a neutral act of leaving people alone; it signals that the substance has been judged acceptable, makes it easier to obtain, and increases the number of people using it. A government that legalises recreational marijuana therefore takes on some responsibility for the additional harm that follows, and sanctions further damage to public health in doing so. The position is not prohibition in every form. Medical use is a different case, because it is supervised, the dose is controlled, and the risks are weighed against a diagnosed condition by someone qualified to weigh them. That is precisely the structure recreational use lacks. Proponents of this position conclude that cannabis should be available for medical purposes and not beyond them.

Premises

Counter-arguments

While marijuana may be linked to negative health effects, they are incredibly minor compared to certain substances that are already sanctioned by the state. Both alcohol and tobacco are addictive, and in the U.S. alone thousands of people die per year from both alcohol poisoning and smoking tobacco. It does not make sense to continue to prohibit a drug with significantly less negative health incomes than alcohol and tobacco on the basis that it is negative for public health.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The health drawbacks of marijuana are far lesser than some other drugs which are sanctioned by the government.