- Negative answers to the question "Would you want your children to be smoking marijuana?" are the most convincing arguments of those who oppose the legalization of marijuana. For legalization, the monetary argument is most convincing, where estimates are made both on potential law-enforcement savings and on potential revenues generated from taxes on growing, producing and consuming marijuana. These "pros" hold that because most lawbreakers caught using marijuana only get a "slap on the wrist" anyway, savings and revenues might as well be realized.
- The anti-legalization side argues marijuana is addictive and a health hazard, eliciting a pro-legalization argument that counters "only if taken frequently and in large doses." The "antis" cite studies linking the drug to cancer, respiratory problems, heart attack and damage to the immune system, noting that short-term hazards include memory loss, distorted perception and loss of motor skill. The "pros" say marijuana helps increase appetite and relieve symptoms of glaucoma, with the antis countering there are better drugs for these. Proponents for legalization argue that if marijuana is grown legally, cures for other ills could be found.
- Antis argue that marijuana is a hazard not only to users but also to those around them, just as second-hand tobacco smoke is. They cite statistics linking marijuana usage to crime and to driving accidents, saying marijuana affects the ability to concentrate, stay alert, coordinate and react, making it difficult to judge distances, read signs and react to signals. The pros argue that the same happens with consumption of alcohol and at times with tobacco smoking, both of which are legal.
- Pros say limitations on alcohol consumption and tobacco smoking can also be imposed on marijuana use. As with alcohol, an age limit can be imposed on minors. And as with tobacco smoking, there can be restricted-use locales as well as mandated labels on packaging citing marijuana's potential health dangers. The antis counter that alcohol and tobacco are not as dangerous and do not lead to deadlier drugs later in life, alleging as well that proponents for legalization aim to get the stronger drugs legalized later.
- Antis cite studies proving few users of drugs (other than marijuana) have done so without first having tried marijuana. They conclude marijuana leads to use of more dangerous, stronger and harder drugs and substances like cocaine and heroin. Pros argue that not all marijuana users end up using the stronger drugs and not all users of stronger drugs have even tried marijuana. The antis counter that marijuana takes away inhibitions to drug use and promotes a culture allowing use of other drugs.
