Response to Your Comments

Christal, thanks! It sure as hell is a good blog. We have included quite a few in-text links to help support our facts so you know they are legitimate.

Melody, thanks to you as well. The link you provided, however, makes the point that marijuana is not a gateway drug, and that is not an argument we are trying to make. Here is our stance on that matter as stated in our post “While it may be possible that marijuana can act as a “gateway drug”, the fact remains the legality, or lack thereof, has little to no effect on the drug’s popularity or availability among many places in society”. In addition, your link is not credible enough to be used as evidence on our blog. We don’t really trust “Nydia Swaby” or her Marijuana Policy Project, as it seems quite biased. 

Moni, when you said “this is a good blog”, you were exactly right. You also might be right when you said “the government wouldn’t crack or heroin”. We don’t think they would crack or heroin either.
Also, "Marijuana is actually more dangerous than alcohol and tobacco"? Tobacco has been the cause of 435,000 deaths a year, and alcohol is responsible for another 85,000. Marijuana has a grand total of 0 recorded deaths. That is less than peanuts. Here is further proof of marijuana being safer than alcohol.
Finally, your link is about how marijuana is a gateway drug, which is completely unrelated to the argument that your post made. 

Joe, while our blog was a bit wordy at some parts, those are called "facts". We feel like the phrase “As a widely used product, the financial potential behind this could prove immensely beneficial to our troubled economy” might be a little wordy, but it is the best way to explain how marijuana could benefit the economy. However, the graph you included would be beneficial to someone who is more inclined to just scan the blog for facts and images. Thanks for your input.

Alec We noticed that you said “I have no clue whether you’re for or against or for marijuana”, but literally the very first sentence of our blog says “ the substantial economical and medical benefits, and lack of significant drawbacks, support the notion of reformation in current marijuana legislation”. How can you possibly not tell if we are for or against marijuana? You also say there is "no viable scholarly backing" to our bases on Alzheimer's Disease. Researchers at the Scripps Research Institute in California have a different opinion.
You’re right, our roadmap does go from health benefits to students acquiring drugs. Maybe you forgot to read the first sentence of the paragraph demonstrating how the two are related. Here it is again since you seem to have missed it the first time: “These points show the higher potential for improvements to public health, but possible benefits is often outweighed by speculation over whether or not marijuana might lead to use of harder, more harmful drugs.”
As for your boredom, I apologize that you had to read some facts about marijuana on a blog about marijuana. Also, your examples of us providing “jumps in logic” are, in fact, not jumps in logic. You then went on to write this gem of a sentence: “That caused by this huge road map, readers won’t want to read.” We literally have no idea what that means. In addition, we are glad that you were “more interested with the videos on our sidebar”, although we aren’t quite sure what you are talking about, seeing as there are no videos in the sidebar. Thanks for all your great points though.