Jacques, Renee. ” This Is Why Marijuana Should Be Legal Everywhere.” POLITICS. 24 Oct. 2014. Web. 11 Aug. 2015
In this article Jacques explains how marijuana should be legalized and give the example of “since 2 states have already legalized the substance, it should be legalized everywhere.” In my opinion this makes his point seem weak because it shows that he is “band wagon” his point. He continues by dividing his article into subtopics where he elaborates more on each individual topic. He gives such little detail under each sub topic it shows that he is not very knowledgeable on the subject and makes me question his credibility. He uses his personal beliefs to deeply, when in reality it should be more based on facts.
He starts by mentioning how marijuana has never killed anybody. Does it have to get to those extremes for people to believe that marijuana is harmful to the body? No, I think whether people have died or not, if studies have shown that it causes damage to the brain and body then it should stay illegal. His points on this particular sub topic is just by comparing it to alcohol and other drugs. He could have used people who have actually used marijuana to back up his theory, in order for his point to be stronger.
He continues by saying how 40% of Americans have admitted to using it, that in my opinion does not make it any better. There are many people that have killed and robbed, does that make it right? No, just because so people do it, does not make it any better. That would be an example of concession, because he states how people might think using marijuana is bad, but it really just depends on how the user takes it and on how they personally react.
Overall, his points were not very convincing, he pretty much stated topics and explained it, he gave no references and no persuading aspects.
I do believe that marijuana should be legalized, however this guys choice of diction does not create a good argument. Instead of say that marijuana has never killed anyone he could have said unlike other drugs you can not overdose on marijuana, instead of saying it doesn’t kill you. He could of also said that marijuana has benefited the lives of people who have use it and that unlike pharmaceuticals, there are come breads of marijuana that do not have harmful side effects.
Yeah this guy makes a weak argument for the legalization of marijuana. He doesn’t even use the bandwagon properly. When people jump on the bandwagon it is most likely due to a majority of people wanting it. Two states or 40% are not a majority. As towards the legalization of marijuana I feel that it is a personal choice and if the a majority of the United States wants it and it doesn’t do any harm then there should be no problem.
Sure, he could’ve used better sources. I believe he just rushed his argument. He has flawed argument and it makes me ashamed because I want it legalized. However, it shouldn’t even be compared to alcohol in the first place. Alcohol is way way worse. Marijuana may have side effects, but so does caffeine. So i see some misplaced logic at play
Although I agree with Jacques that marijuana should be legalized, I have an issue with the evidence he uses to back up his argument. They are definitely ineffective. The evidence he provides is mostly things that he’s probably heard before and nothing that is directly cited information. Overall, Jacques doesn’t make a good case for the legalization of marijuana.
I love the Simpson pic, btw!
Well for every good argument there is for the legalization of marijuana, there will probably be a bad argument for the legalization of marijuana. This happens to be the bad one right here. Maybe with some tutoring from Dusty he can turn this poor pro marijuana argument into a good pro marijuana argument.
The reasons this article provides for the legalization of marijuana seem more like statements. The “band wagon” notion does create a bad argument that is not supported. I think it should be legalized in some aspects but just because it makes people happy or a couple of states legalized its use, it does not mean that everyone should.
The arguments Jacques presented were very shallow. Everyone knows about the states that have legalized marijuana, but really don’t know how that will pan out. It wasn’t convincing at all. I liked that you wrote on it though, it gave us an example of a really bad way to argue a point. Without evidence and thorough research, most arguments fall flat.