The Instigator
TheoEkman
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
masterdrave
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

All drugs should be legalised, change my mind.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
TheoEkman
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 4/9/2018 Category: Health
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 404 times Debate No: 112534
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

TheoEkman

Pro

I believe that all drugs should be legalised, whether it is dangerous or not its irrelevant
I challenge anyone to change my mind.

The only downside I see with the legalisation of drugs is that there might be a 1-2% more drug addicts.
masterdrave

Con

Hello, 16-year old TheoEkman. I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
TheoEkman

Pro

My main argument would be that drugs is not harmful to anyone but yourself. But you do not seem to believe in that philosophy, so I'm going to argue more objectively.

The legalisation of drugs would in my opinion stop the development of new, less expensive and potentially more dangerous drugs. Take cocaine for example. The main reason that cocaine got as popular as it did, was because of the high marijuana prices. If the marijuana price would have been lower, cocaine would never have got as popular as it did. That brings the question, why were the marijuana price so high? The answer to that question is that it were illegal. If marijuana would have been legal, the price would have been low thanks to competition. But since it were illegal, it got harder to sell, so the drug dealers could set a higher price. By then, the demand for a new, less expensive drug also went up.

So my point is, the more money we put into the war on drugs, the harder it gets for the drug dealers, forcing the price to go up and forcing a faster development of new, and more powerful drugs. This is the reason to so called Internet drugs today. If the price would be low, nobody would develop new drugs, because there is no demand for it.

People usually say: If we legalise heroin, everybody is going to use heroin!
Well? how many reading this would start using heroin if it were legal? I bet nobody would start using it just because it would be legal. Nobody thinks like this: oh I cant take care of myself, and I don't want to use drugs, so I need the governments laws to take care of me!
Nobody sees the law as an obstacle for drugs, you either want to do drugs, or you don't. Simple as that.

This is why the war on drugs is failing, people will still get drugs even if it is illegal. But if it were legal, some of them would actually seek help to cure their addiction. If its illegal, then instead of help, we put them in prisons, where there is a higher rate of drugs and criminality then out in the real world.
masterdrave

Con

The legalisation of drugs would in my opinion not stop the development of new, less expensive and potentially more dangerous drugs. Take cocaine for example. The main reason that cocaine got as popular as it did, was because of the low marijuana prices. If the marijuana price would have been higher, cocaine would never have got as popular as it did. That brings the question, why were the marijuana price so low? The answer to that question is that it were legal. If marijuana would have been illegal, the price would have been low thanks to competition. But since it were legal, it got easier to sell, so the drug dealers could set a lower price. By then, the demand for a new, less expensive drug didn't go up.

So my point is, the less money we put into the war on drugs, the harder it gets for the drug dealers, forcing the price to go up and forcing a faster development of new, and more powerful drugs. This is the reason to so called Internet drugs today. If the price would be low, everybody would develop new drugs, because there is a demand for it.
Debate Round No. 2
TheoEkman

Pro

You are just changing my words into the opposite, could you please explain why you believe this way? Right now you are not even arguing, you are probably just trolling, but I have a question for you: If drugs are illegal because people are too stupid to be trusted to decide if they want to "ruin their lives" with drugs, why are the same people, through voting, qualified to make good decisions with regards to, war, economics, abortion, the death penalty, international trade, schools, immigration, liberties… and yes ironically, if people should be allowed to do drugs or not?


masterdrave

Con

Drugs Are Illegal Because Drugs Are Dangerous
PrintEmail Details Category: Testimonies and SpeechesPublished: 01 May 2001
Canadian Police Association submissions to the Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs
May 2001

The full text is available in English and French from HNN or at the CPA web site at http://www.cpa-acp.ca...

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Drugs Are Illegal Because Drugs Are Dangerous

Drugs are not dangerous because they are illegal; drugs are illegal because drugs are dangerous. There is no such thing as "soft drugs" and "hard drugs", nor bona fide criteria to differentiate between these terms. People who refer to hard or soft drugs generally do not understand the truth about drugs, or are seeking to soften attitudes towards the use of certain illicit drugs. Generally, Marijuana (Cannabis) and its derivative products are described in this context to distance the drug from the recognized harm associated with other illegal drugs. This has been a successful, yet dangerous approach, and contributes to the misinformation, misunderstanding, and increasing tolerance associated with marijuana use.

Marijuana is a powerful drug with a variety of effects. Marijuana users are subject to a variety of adverse health consequences:

" Respiratory Damage

" Physical Coordination

" Pregnancy & Post-Natal development

" Memory & Cognition

" Psychiatric Effects

Marijuana use is associated with poor work and school performance, and learning problems for younger users. Marijuana is internationally recognized as the gateway drug for other drug use. Risk factors for marijuana dependence are similar to those for other forms of drug abuse, and much higher than those of alcohol.

Driving while intoxicated by drugs impairs judgment and motor coordination. In one study involving aircraft, ten licensed pilots were given one marijuana joint containing 19 mg of THC, a relatively small amount. Twenty-four hours after smoking the jo
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
There should be a creation of (Kids Rights,) this way if an adult decides to use illegal drugs around the kids, the kid or kids can protect themselves with their Kids Rights to not have an adult do illegal drugs around them, or legalized weed around them either.

This way, if a kid is using drugs around another kid, the kid is protected from the drug using kid as well?

Where did you get this ridiculous talking point from?

"If the kid is viewing it as harmful to his or her childhood then yes. If he or she is aware of the dangers of doing drugs, but still say that it was never harmful to their childhood then no, since nobody viewed themselves as a victim, then there never were a crime."

Using illegal drugs around kids, is victimizing the kid or kids? (Or because of your pro drug stance, you maybe wont allow yourself to view it that way?

Let me guess, do you maybe view the law making weed illegal as a way to victimize the drug user, right?
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
Dude, my laws?

Grow up, they are the laws of this country.
Posted by TheoEkman 1 month ago
TheoEkman
As I said, I want driving while high to be illegal. You seem to be making a point by saying that the drug addicts do not care about the "drugged driving law". But why do you think that the same people that is not following these laws will follow the YOUR laws making all drugs illegal?

Yes, and no to the last question. If the kid is viewing it as harmful to his or her childhood then yes. If he or she is aware of the dangers of doing drugs, but still say that it was never harmful to their childhood then no, since nobody viewed themselves as a victim, then there never were a crime. But most of the times yes, sort of, since drugs are illegal in most countries today, then yes, it will probably be harmful for the kids. Since the parents are showing the kids that laws can be broken.
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
"YOU are the one that want to force everyone into living life by YOUR ways of living and beliefs. People who do not harm others should not be punished."

The drugged drivers who have harmed innocent people are the ones who are forcing their ways and belief on other by how they abuse the drugged driving laws? (Do you think that maybe the public I'm general might not view the drugged driver abusing the drugged driving laws as a form of punishment onto the rest of the public, by breaking that very law?)

Do the kids who are and have been living with the weed users drug use illegally for generations, you don't view the drug users illegal drug use around the kids and families as a way to force their drug using ways and beliefs onto those kids and families?
Posted by TheoEkman 1 month ago
TheoEkman
Taking drugs, and driving while high, are two very different things. Driving high should be illegal because then you are exposing others for unnecessary risks that they did not agree upon.

I would gladly present my pro drug position to anybody. I'm not afraid to tell people what I believe in.

You are saying that I lack of empathy and respect??
YOU are the one that want to force everyone into living life by YOUR ways of living and beliefs. People who do not harm others should not be punished. As I said 1 in 3 adults have been doing drugs, while only 5.4% of everyone have a drug problem. If I'm the one who lacks empathy and respect, then why am I the one who want to help these 5.4% by offering medical help? The other option is to put them in prison, where there is a higher rate of drugs and criminality than there is out in the real world. If you don't lack of respect, then why do you want to force these 28% of people who are capable of handling drugs into living YOUR way of life, they have not done any harm to you at all. If you personally advocate that I should be caged if I don't live the life that YOU want, please don't pretend to be tolerant, or non-violent, or enlightened, or respectful or compassionate. Don't pretend you believe in "live and let live," and don't pretend you want peace, freedom or harmony.

I can accept when people disagree with me, but I do not accept when people are calling me out for having no respect for other people. I'm the one that want them to live whatever life they would like. You are the one manipulating them to live life your way, which is not working, the war on drugs is failing more than ever at the moment.

I'm not saying that drugs are healthy, I would never do them in a million years. But I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his or her own way.
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
Parents Opposed to Pot: Why not go to their website and present your pro drug position to them?

"But is not that what freedom is all about? Taking your own risks?"

Dude, people took risks with their drugged driving practices and people lost their lives in the process of the drugged drivers who ignored the law making drugged driving illegal.

You need some new talking points, because the ideology that you appear to maybe be pushing, seems to lack much empathy, respect, or self respect for that matter?
Posted by TheoEkman 1 month ago
TheoEkman
Well, you did name the other sides of the argument.

None of the cases that you named had a drug user that could handle drugs involved in them. If that is the case, then I think that the drug user should be offered help.

But is not that what freedom is all about? Taking your own risks?
Why wont people want to go to prison? Where there is free health care, free food, security, and so on? The reason is simple, its because of the lack of freedom. They would rather take the risk of having no food, and no health care, than to not be free. The same thing could be said about everything. 1 out of 3 adults have tried drugs, and most of them never got addicted. So why would you mention a small and exceptional case, in order to prove that all drugs are bad? You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist, no matter how hard you scream. So why would someone take an exceptional small case in order to make every case illegal, just to minimize somebody else's freedom, especially when that somebody is not hurting anybody else when doing it?

But once again, these cases will continue to happen even if it is illegal. The drug use does not rise more than 1% when legalized.
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
TheoEkman: No comment?
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
TheoEkman: No comment?
Posted by TKDB 1 month ago
TKDB
My challenge to you, present both sides of the argument?

Not just the pro drug side?

Maybe in a sense, not just the drug users side?

Parents Opposed to Pot side? Ever heard of them? They aren't pro weed.

The families who have lost loved ones to the actions of the drugged drivers who have harmed innocent people? (What about their sides of the argument?)

The families who have kids getting taught how to use illegal drugs by the kids who are using the illegal drugs? (Where is there side of the argument?)

calmca.org: Ever heard of them? They aren't a pro weed.

Rise Above the Influence: Ever heard of them? They aren't pro weed either.

Where are the opposing point of views to your pro drug arguments TheoEkman?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 month ago
dsjpk5
TheoEkmanmasterdrave
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-