P1: When something is illegal it does not mean people will stop consuming.
P2: There will be less criminal activity
P3: The U.S. government can charge tax and increase income
P4: The U.S. government is okay with a ton of different types of drug and substances such as caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, and preservatives put into our foods, so why not legalize it all?
C: Legalizing all drugs can bring profit to the U.S.
The first premise is something that has been proved for years. The alcohol prohibition is a great example, people didn’t stop consuming alcohol because it was prohibited. On the contrary it led to bootlegging. Bootlegging led to organized crime and made many people wealthy. All of that could have been avoided if alcohol would have had remained legalized. Same goes for drugs. No matter what you tell people ‘’it’s illegal’’, ‘’you can do time in prison’’, ‘’it’s bad for you’’. When someone wants to do something, they are going to do it and no law is going to stop them.
The second premise is justified by looking at our prisons. Many criminals in prison are
…show more content…
If all premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Prohibiting a good does not eliminate the demand and the market for it. In fact, prohibiting may increase the use for it because some get a kick out of defying the government, especially teenagers. As a result, legalizing it may reduce drug consumption by teenagers; they will no longer think it’s cool and might not want to do drugs. In a free society, the presumption must always be that individuals, not government, get to decide what is in their own best interest. Some may say, ‘won’t people become more addicted to drugs?’, but the answer is no, because as stated above, tobacco is legal and not everyone is addicted to products such as cigerrates. Moreover, alcohol is legal and we are not all alcoholics. It is irrational to believe that ordain the legalization of drugs will cause such an epidemic of drug