Rhetorical Analysis

The legalization of drugs has been a controversial topic for years and years. Donnie R. Marshall, a previous Deputy Administrator for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, gave a speech on why he thinks drugs should stay illegal. I will argue that Marshall’s view on drug legalization is wrong because drug laws are preventing from a greater America. Marshall argues that drugs ought to be illegal because, “the first outcome of legalization would be to have a lot more drugs around, and, in turn, a lot more drug abuse”. To begin his explanation he states, “Supply drives demand” and references is as some sort of economical law. He follows that up by stating that if supply increases, drug use increases. If both of those statements are true

You will not see supply drive demand in the majority of the markets. For example, cigarettes’ demand, another drug, is not driven by supply. If a gas station increases its supply of cigarettes, more people are not going to become smokers because they have another case of Marlboro Red stocked in the back. Also people will not favor a specific gas station over another because it has a higher supply. I actually could see the use going down, young adults do drugs because of the taboo that it associated with it. If it is no longer illegal and severely looked down upon by the rest of the community then it would no longer be as “fun” to participate. Marshal also argues that all drugs ought to be illegal because legalization would contribute to a rise in crime. His first premise is legalization will boost drug use. Then he claims that “there’s a close relationship between drugs and crime.” So if drugs and crime is closely related, and legalization boost drug use, then his argument would be correct. However, this argument fails because he used his first argument, which I debunked, as a premise in his second argument. Since legalization will not increase use, crime will not increase. Crime would even