• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Should We Legalise Drugs

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Should We Legalise Drugs? It is a powerful question. One that evokes all kinds of immediate, knee-jerk responses; from "yea, way to go dude!", to "oh my God no, it will destroy this country". But let's try to get past the immediate gut response and look at the situation calmly and coolly. The main fear, and argument against legalisation, is that the number of drug users will increase, perhaps doubling, tripling, or quadrupling; until we become a nation of drug crazed zombies - something approaching "Night of the Living Dead", but presumably without the cannibalism, but who knows. This fear, and much used argument, has no basis in fact or any scientific study. People who are inclined to use drugs are already using drugs. People who are not inclined to use drugs are not using drugs. That won't change once drugs are legal (or decriminalised). It is not as if the law is the only thing stopping drug users from using drugs. For young people, drugs are readily available in college and high school (and probably junior high as well). ...read more.

Middle

are illegal; there will always be that segment of youth that uses drugs; no matter what laws are on the books. What about adults; who can presumably make educated decisions about what or what not, to put into their bodies? Why should the government tell me what I can, or can't, smoke, drink, inhale, shoot-up or snort. What I put into my body is my own business; whether it is a joint, or a Big-Mac; and in fact, there could be some argument as to, which is worse for me. However, that is not the point. Even if a substance or food is horrible for me, I should be allowed to drink, smoke, snort, inject, or eat it. I am only harming myself; which is my divine right. I am not saying that these are smart, good or logical choices to make; I am just saying that they are an individual's choice to make, not the governments. The Constitution does not guarantee outcomes, it only guarantees the ground rules. ...read more.

Conclusion

That is my decision, and my body, not theirs. If I choose to not exercise, and have a diet of half & half, Cocoa Puffs, and canned frosting; drink a fifth of scotch and smoke four packs of cigarettes everyday, then that is my business and I am protected in my "lifestyle" under the law. However, if I eat right and exercise, don't smoke cigarettes or drink booze; but once in a while, smoke a little pot, I am a criminal - all in the name of protecting myself. Does that make sense to anyone out there? My body belongs to me, not to the United States government. Whatever I want to do with my body is my business. I am not asking for government handouts or entitlement to drugs. I am just asking to be left alone to do with my body what I may. It is my right and everyone's right; and fortunately we are a nation of fairly common sense individuals who will do what is best for themselves. Just what the founders envisioned. "Law, being a sign of Corruption in Man; many laws are signs of Corruption of a State." ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Law essays

  1. Worlds Apart: Orientalism, Antifeminism, and Heresy in Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale

    to grant its autonomous status, would seem to undergird the repugnance some Christians experienced over the forced conversion of Muslims. Delany cites William of Tripoli and thirteenth-century Dominican and Franciscan missionaries who "believed in the principle that God is not pleased by forced worship."

  2. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    the amount of the check and transfers those funds to its own certified check punt. In effect, the bank is agreeing in advance to accept that check when it is presented for payment and to make payment from those funds reserved in the certified check account.

  1. Why Marijuana Should Be Legalised

    Drug dealers and users seem to constantly be one step ahead of the authorities, anyway.

  2. Law in association with the criminalisation of certain drugs.

    Subsequently, in the nineteen twenties, legislation such as the Opium Proclamation 1926, were enacted pre-emptively and in compliance with international pressures.10 Throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, the statutes pertaining to the criminalisation of drugs continued to evolve. Prohibition was accepted as the only method of dealing with drugs,

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work