A big focus on social issues in politics, especially during this election year, will be the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. The issues like this that can sway an election are important. There is support coming from both sides as Republicans have views of less government involvement in what people do and Democrats, particularly younger ones support legalization with awareness of social injustice and waste of tax dollars. Even concerning economics, one of the things being considered is if legalization occurs, would there be taxes put on the drugs like a regular business. All of these concerns surrounding legalization are interesting to me because the some aspects of the future of the country are based on it.  I am in the younger generation that supports the legalization of marijuana and my values include thinking that people should be able to make the choice of what they want to do. In the younger generation, celebrities and even some presidents are known to have smoked marijuana and are idolized for it. The older generations with a negative image on the drug, as well as a lot of people in between who do not know how to feel. I know people who support different sides of the argument. In my family, most of the younger generation is in agreement of legalization while the adult and grandparent generation agrees that the drug should remain prohibited. 

Source one, 'The Push for Legal Marijuana Spreads', includes a few main points in support of marijuana legalization: Both Canada and Mexico are legalizing recreational use of the drug, changes to legislation would also allow states to have the individual freedom to decide how to regulate the drug, and keeping a ban on marijuana is doing more harm than good to society. For example, keeping the ban spends billions on imprisoning people for violating pointlessly harsh laws. The major piece of evidence is about Canada and Mexico's influence will affect US legislation. All of the evidence presented in the article are reasons why legalization would be the best option. The article is in support of legalizing marijuana for recreational use so the interests of each of the author's opinions are at stake. The source shows how prohibition is not working and needs to change. That could be through legalization or decriminalization. At least decriminalization so the country can focus marijuana as a public health issue rather than a criminal issue. This is both an opinion and informative article because there is evidence, not just argument. The article has bias in favor of legalizing marijuana. The first sentence says how the increase in support is a good thing and the rest of the article presents evidence to back it up. There are 19 writers who all have a wide range of expertise and represent the voice of the newspaper and the board. 

Source two, 'Why Legalizing Pot is a Bad Idea', shows the opinion that is against making marijuana a legal substance. Support for Marijuana legalization is down in the last year. One of the major arguments is that pot is a dangerous substance. There is a list of specific negative side effects from an agency in Colorado. For example, the majority of DUI drug arrests involve marijuana, youth and college user consumption of marijuana has increased, and a few more statistics support pot prohibition. The article misinterprets evidence such as the DUI argument because marijuana and alcohol cannot be treated the same, and DUI's involving marijuana have probably increased because they are checking for them. The changing of legislation would put the interests of this article at stake because of the studies they use as evidence to prove that marijuana is a dangerous substance for the public. The credibility of the article is not strong due to the lack of focusing on the key issues. The values of this opinion piece are also at stake because it would go against what the author thinks is best. The bias of this source is against legalization. All of the evidence presented is really only supporting one side and there is no consideration of arguments from the other side. The author, Cully Stimson, is an expert in criminal law, military law, military commissions and detention policy at The Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, so he has the credentials to support his opinions. The bias of his writing comes through the foundation he works for, who is pretty strict about what they talk about and how they do it. 

Source three, '6 Powerful Reasons to Legalize Marijuana, From the New York Times', summarizes the best reasons for marijuana legalization: Prohibition of marijuana has enormous social costs, the benefits of criminalization are minimal, prohibition is racist, cannabis has legitimate medical effects, legalization won't lead to increased use, and it is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco. While medical use and recreational use are two different things, medical cannabis can open doors to the idea of legalizing recreational marijuana. The major interest of this article is not only to make marijuana legal and take down prohibition of the substance, but also to support the writing of the New York Times article about legalization from the Editorial Board. The values of this piece are at stake if marijuana does not have positive effects. The bias of the article is towards legalizing marijuana and ending its prohibition. While the article does go off of a credible source like the New York Times opinion of the Editorial Board, the author Owen Poindexter, is only a free lance writer for Alternet. 

This research question is arguable because there can be evidence and opinions for both positive and negative effects of legalizing marijuana. I would revise the question by trying to make it less of a yes or no question. It can not be directly answered by typing it on to Google, but it can probably be worded better. The different perspectives of the sources made me broaden my view because I thought legalizing was better from the start. The biggest disagreements are in the effects of legalizing marijuana and whether or not it's a good substance. The way I will change my argument is looking at the current system around marijuana laws and regulations and argue how legalization, decriminalization and regulation could address the concerns. 

