Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 1

Legalization of Marijuana

Corinne Watkins

Florida State University

Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 2

In the legal and political communities, the debate over the legalization and

decriminalization of marijuana has become very heated throughout recent years. Many argue in

favor of the legalization of marijuana, claiming the dangers have been over exaggerated and that

marijuana usage presents little to no danger to the country. Others counter argue in hopes of

keeping the drug illegal, saying marijuana usage in the United States leads to dangerous

behaviors and problems in communities where the drug is present. This issue has become a hot

button topic in the media and has been used as a talking point for political candidates in almost

every election in recent years. While many states have begun the process of legalization and the

idea has become generally more accepted, there is an equal amount of pushback and argument

against this legalization. New laws and amendments surrounding this issue are often presented

each election season and people on both sides must work to persuade others in their direction.

However, simply presenting one's opinion on the topic is not enough to persuade masses of

people. Both sides must imply rhetorical strategies in order to persuade people in their favor and

find more supporters. By analyzing two artifacts on different sides of this issue, you can see how

people work to persuade an audience in favor of their side.

Many people argue in favor of the legalization of marijuana for both medical and

recreational usage. In an article written in favor of the legalizations of marijuana, the author uses

rhetoric to establish their side of the argument. The structure of this article perfectly sets the

stage for a good pro-legalization argument. First, the author begins by describing the history of

laws against cannabis and transitions into the reasons for cannabis to be legal. By starting with

unbiased factual information, the author grabs the reader's attention before giving their opinion

on the subject. The author then outlines how the black market deals of marijuana make it nearly
Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 3
impossible to completely stop the sale and use of marijuana in the United States. By claiming

that the production and sale may be impossible to stop, the author suggests that we abandon the

idea and start searching for alternatives. The author also notes “The serious question is not

whether to legalize cannabis, but how”(Kleiman). This quote is used to make it look as if there is

no other option other than to legalize the usage and sale of marijuana and implies a tone of

authority by stating what the author believes is the only option. The author also uses the

rhetorical strategy known as logos to appeal to the logical senses of their readers. The author

does this by using factual evidence about the origins of marijuana and very factual evidence to

prove they have done their research on the subject and uses the facts to help appeal to reader’s

logic and make them believe in the information presented. The author then proceeds to use a

method of compare and contrast in their favor by comparing marijuana usage to alcohol usage.

Alcohol is widely an acceptable intoxicant in many places and while laws are made to help

prevent alcohol abuse, it is generally accepted and even encouraged by cities whose economy is

built on nightlife. By showing the similar qualities of an intoxicant that many people are familiar

and comfortable with, the author is making people feel more comfortable with the idea of

marijuana usage. This method of comparison and contrast is a great strategy in developing

connections between two substances that many have different feelings towards and helping

people feel more comfortable with the idea of marijuana usage. Furthermore, the author

addresses how the criminalization of marijuana has led to more problems in low income

neighborhoods. The author also suggests that this criminalization of the drug has contributed to

problems with racism in law enforcement and arrests. “Cannabis users who are young and black

or Latino are far more likely to be arrested than their white peers, primarily because they are

more likely to live in high-crime areas that (properly) attract more police attention, but partly
Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 4
because they are frequent targets of the "stop-question-frisk" tactics that police departments use

primarily to deter gun-carrying, but which also result in a large number of arrests for simple

cannabis possession” (Kleiman). By connecting the issue of marijuana criminalization and

racism, the author is suggesting that the issue of racism, which is largely disapproved of in

society, has been made worse by the criminalization of marijuana. This article provides a very

strong case for the pro-legalization side of the marijuana debate. Overall, the author makes good

use of rhetorical strategies in order to help persuade their audience in favor of the pro-

legalization point of view.

The next artifact being examined is a youtube video that uses drawings to help explain

explore the pros and cons of legalizing marijuana. The narrator of the video uses bright attention

grabbing colors on a white board in order to grab the audiences attention. In addition to this, the

narrator gives a history of the legalization of marijuana and uses several statistics and

percentages to establish a basis of fact for the rest of the video. The narrator explores both the

arguments for and against legalization without taking a specific stance on which one he believes

is right. Since this artifact does not take a specific side of the issue, it is encouraging its audience

to analyze the information given and come to a conclusion of their own. While this may not be

most effective in bringing an audience to a specific side, it does promote a more well rounded

thinking base for the issue.

Finally, these artifacts both are successful in their use of rhetorical techniques in hopes of

getting their message across. The article does a great job of structuring information in a way that

draws readers in and slowly brings about the presentation of the author’s opinion and views on

the topic. By presenting facts and interesting information before the argument, the author is

likely to draw readers in and make them more open to listening to the argument than if they had
Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 5
just laid out their views in the beginning. The strongpoint of the youtube video was how

impartial it was and how it used bright visuals to get an audience’s attention. The main

differences between these two artifacts is the way they are presented. The article gives a very

one-sided view of the topic in the sense that only the author chooses the material to present while

the youtube video explores and gives value to both sides of the issue. While the article might be

more likely to persuade a reader in favor of the author’s side, the video is definitely better in the

sense that both sides are challenged which allows the viewers to think for themselves and form a

more well-rounded opinion on the subject.

Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 6

References

Here's the cautionary tale on legalization on cannabis: Fmr. NY Times reporter [Video

file]. (2019, April 2). Retrieved 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=5sBusWXltMA

Illustrate to Educate, director. Should Marijuana Be Legalized? Should Marijuana Be

Legalized?

Kleiman, M., Mark A. R. Kleiman is a Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron

Institute of Urban Management, Delisle, J., & Riley, N. (n.d.). The Public-Health Case for

Legalizing Marijuana. Retrieved November 02, 2020, from

https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-public-health-case-for-legalizing-

marijuana
Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 7
Author’s Name: _Corrine Watkins____ Reader’s Name: ___Dakota Klapper___

Author: Identify one feature of your essay for which you would like feedback.

Corrine would like feedback on her use of rhetorical techniques as evidence.

1. Read your partner’s essay aloud. This is not an option: you must read the essay aloud so
that you and the author might detect awkward phrasing and sentences, and other mistakes.

1. Write down the author’s pressing issue and field artifacts.

The authors pressing issue is the legalization of marijuana.

Field artifact #1: article in favor of legalization of marijuana
Field Artifact # 2: CNBC interview with Alex Berenson- anti marijuana

1. Write down the rhetorical strategies (i.e., audience, tone, rhetorical appeals) the author
analyzes in the essay.
- Rhetoric, logos, ethos- credibility, audience

1. Does the author use a four-step process for analyzing their artifacts?
2.
2.a.Identify what the artifact does: _YES____
2.b.Provide examples from the artifact: _YES____
2.c.Explain how examples address a pressing issue: _YES____
2.d.Indicate what this tells readers about the artifact or academic field: _YES____

1. Is the author’s structure clear and organized? Does the author provide a balanced analysis
of both field artifacts?
The authors structure is clear. There could be some more organization by breaking up the
paragraphs based on rhetorical appeals and techniques. The author could use some more analysis
in the video portion. She can analyze how else the speaker establishes credibility to the audience
(for example his appearance or his delivery).
Running Head: LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA 8

1. What conclusions does your partner draw from the analysis of their field objects? How
will these conclusions help your partner compose in their field?
My partner draws the conclusion that each of the authors use rhetorical techniques
to get their message across. My partner also concludes that establishing credibility and
using reason can help authors effectivity express their views.

These conclusions will help my partner compose in her field. She will now be
able to identify her audience and use rhetorical techniques that could have a persuasive
effect on them.