It or tobacco is untenable. Just because a
It has been argued that unlike alcohol and tobacco, marijuana is harmful and should therefore not be legalized. The argument that marijuana causes more damage than alcohol or tobacco is untenable. Just because a thing is considered to be more harmful than another harmful product does not necessarily mean that it should not be legalized. If a thing is to be declared illegal because it is harmful then it follows that all things that are harmful should also be declared illegal.
The predicate that since marijuana is harmful and should therefore not be legalized suffers from generalizations that cannot be countenanced. As studies have shown, marijuana, when regulated and given in the right amounts has shown to have medicinal properties. It has been known to help with migraines and vision problems. It has also been shown that marijuana does not pose a great a risk as causing cancer than tobacco. As such, it cannot even be considered as something that is totally harmful.
To say that alcohol and tobacco are not as harmful as marijuana would be to disregard all of the findings and statistics regarding the same. Drunken driving still remains the highest cause of vehicular accidents all over the world. In the same vein, prolonged tobacco usage has been proven to increase the chances of cancer. If the argument is hinged on the fact that one object is more harmful than the other it must first be proven that the others do not or would do less harm.
This has not been shown. Therefore, if one is to draw the analogy that by being more harmful than alcohol or tobacco marijuana should not be declared legal, then alcohol or tobacco have to be absolutely shown to be less harmful than marijuana. This analogy cannot just be drawn from isolated cases but must be drawn from more concrete evidence showing the same. As such, the statement that marijuana should be declared illegal because it is more harmful is not logical.