The Instigator
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
HempforVictory
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

Cannibis is the DEVIL WEED and all users should be shot on sight !

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,414 times Debate No: 1078
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (15)

 

Solarman1969

Pro

This is obviously tongue in cheek- look at my political party- I just like good headlines

I saw your tag and thought we could start a thread about Pot legalization versus the current drug war and the nonsense going on here in CA with medical marijuana and what a joke the fed policy is

I think were both on the same side- pro- but I can take the devils advocate

cheers

Solarman
HempforVictory

Con

Hello Solarman. Before we begin, I think you've made a few mistakes in naming the debate and your opening argument. First of all, it's cannabis, not cannibis. More importantly, cannabis is a broad term that includes marijuana as well as industrial hemp. Since devil weed had at one time referred to marijuana, but never industrial hemp, I'll assume for now that you do not consider a person wearing a pair of hemp jeans to be a cannabis user.

In your opening argument you say that you think we are both on the pro side of this debate. I can assure you that I am definitely against shooting cannabis users on sight. Since you claim to be acting as the devils advocate, I will also assume that you meant to say con....that we are both on the con side of the debate.

Assuming that you do not think that cannabis users should be shot on sight, your position on the question of its legality is still unknown. I believe that marijuana, and all forms of cannabis, should be made fully legal and available to the public for adults of a reasonable age. Since the legal age for drinking is 21, this would be a suitable age for being able to purchase marijuana.

Now I will briefly introduce a few reasons why marijuana should be legal.

1) It is less dangerous in the short term compared to other legal substances. (i.e. alcohol and numerous over-the-counter and prescription medications.) There has not been a single case of a person overdosing from smoking marijuana.

2) It has less severe long term health effects compared to other legal substances. (i.e. tobacco)

3) It's psychoactive effects are less severe than other legal substances.(i.e. alcohol)

4) It has several known medical benefits.

5) There are potentially many undiscovered medical benefits associated with the plant as the functions of the numerous cannabinoid receptors throughout the body are still unknown. Further research will not commence, or will at least be hindered without legalization.

6) The trade of marijuana would result in an increased GDP and increased tax collection, as opposed to currently being a drain on our economy and pulling money into the black market.
Debate Round No. 1
Solarman1969

Pro

you obviously got my idea

I will get back to you later with some silly "pro" ideas that come from the stupid federal guvmint

of course , vaporizing is far superior to smoking, but I digress.....

cheers
HempforVictory

Con

<<
(1) It is a gateway drug

(2) It causes people to be lazy and unproductive

(3) It causes acute paranoia in some people

(4) It is bad for the lungs>>>

Those are all very common arguments against marijuana legalization, but all of them are weak arguments that can easily be shot down.

1) The only reason that marijuana is a gateway drug is because it is illegal, if it were to be legalized it would no longer encourage the use of other drugs. The only reason why marijuana may potentially lead users onto other drugs is because the people who sell it often deal with other drugs and may try to push them on marijuana users. If it were legalized and sold in special stores, there would be no pressure to try other drugs and it would no longer be a gateway drug.

2) In order to make that kind of statement, it would have to be true that all or at least a majority of pot smokers are lazy and unproductive. However, that is not the case. There are many people who enjoy smoking marijuana that hold steady jobs and/or get good grades in school. While it may be true that a high percentage of unproductive people smoke marijuana, that is simply indicative of the mindset that corresponds to that lifestyle. I would contend that marijuana does not make people lazy, but rather that lazy people are drawn to marijuana.

3) And some people are deathly allergic to peanuts, shall those be made illegal as well? Not everybody has to smoke it, but the people that want to should be allowed to.

4) In that regard, cigarettes are much, much worse than marijuana. It may be true that one joint introduces more carcinogens than one cigarette, because cigarettes are normally filtered, but the fact remains that most marijuana users will smoke an average of one joint per day or less. Cigarette smokers will smoke between 15 and 20 cigarettes every day on average. As a result of this high rate of tobacco smoking, there are over 400,000 cases of lung cancer related to cigarettes. To my knowledge, there is not a single case of lung cancer where the victim smoked marijuana and nothing else.
Debate Round No. 2
Solarman1969

Pro

Ok you win!

hee hee hee

no seriously, the goverment ban in pot is one of the stupidest things around

Solarman
HempforVictory

Con

Well that was hard. It would be nice to debate someone who actually thinks that marijuana should remain illegal who actually has a good reason for why they think so, if such a person even exists. From what I understand, the initial laws against marijuana, such as the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, was passed based on propoganda, which was essentially spread and/or funded by rich men who stood to lose a lot of money from a re-emerging hemp industry. Hemp had been the main or one of the main sources for paper, textiles, oil, and even bio-composites for thousands of years before it was replaced by cotton for cloth after the invention of the cotton gin, paper from timber and oil from petroleum. Up until the 20th century, all hemp processing was done by hand. By the time a machine was invented that could process the tough hemp fibers, the public had a very negative opinion about cannabis. Than WWII happened, and the government showed pro-hemp propoganda films(like my avy) to farmers to encourage them to grow hemp for the war effort. Ten years later, it became a crime to grow any kind of cannabis, for whatever purpose. And now, farmers from all over the midwest are petitioning the government to be able to grow hemp. Just recently, two farmers from Nebraska sued the government for their right to grow hemp, and the DEA holds firm on their position that it is illegal to grow, despite the fact that industrial hemp has no psychoactive effects due to its inappreciable levels of THC. Now I don't want to say that the reason marijuana is illegal is to suppress the hemp industry, but it certainly does seem that way.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by aredcard4u 9 years ago
aredcard4u
wow... I want my 2 minutes back...
please....
Posted by longjonsilver 9 years ago
longjonsilver
Who voted for Solarman?!?!?!?!?!

Even HE admitted defeat. I just don't get it.
Posted by Stashu18 9 years ago
Stashu18
solarman this is your best dbate yet
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
vaping rules- smoking is too harsh!

cheers
Posted by killa_connor 9 years ago
killa_connor
Solarman - Finally something we agree on. Except I definitely prefer smoking to the vaporizer =)
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
kill all the hippies!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

- the federal guvmint

OH YEAH - lets get all those medical users too!
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
I ahve to say...gunshot wounds are gonna be alot more negatively affecting than any pot would, solarman.
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
here are my government agruments against shooting people on site who do pot

(1) It is a gateway to killing them

(2) It causes people to be dead

(3) It causes acute paranoia in some people

(4) It is bad for the lungs, especially if the bullet hits the lungs
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
Oooops! I meant that to be a comment

here are my government agruments against legalization

(1) It is a gateway drug

(2) It causes people to be lazy and unproductive

(3) It causes acute paranoia in some people

(4) It is bad for the lungs

I cant really think of any other good ones

Im voting for Cheech Marin for president!
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
"Shot on sight"?

"devil weed"?

If it is bad because it degenerates there health, then I will let you in on a little secret:

Bullet wounds are alot more harmfull to you're state of health then cannibis.

And christians can label anything they simply...don't like so much...as affiliated with the devil...and ther4e is really nothing to back it up.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Padfoot36 9 years ago
Padfoot36
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by maxh 9 years ago
maxh
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by longjonsilver 9 years ago
longjonsilver
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Stashu18 9 years ago
Stashu18
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by wheelhouse3 9 years ago
wheelhouse3
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by IcicledTori 9 years ago
IcicledTori
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kenito001 9 years ago
kenito001
Solarman1969HempforVictoryTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03