The Instigator
Flipbook
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
sweetbreeze
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Cigarettes Should Become Completely Illegal In America

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
sweetbreeze
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/11/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 879 times Debate No: 35495
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Flipbook

Con

You voted me down, not because I was a worse debater, but that you agreed with the other side. So I want to see your debate skills.

You can go first.
sweetbreeze

Pro

I voted you down because I agreed with the other side, but the other side really did convince me. And why does it have to be in America? I don't even live there! Please be aware of where people live before you start talking!

No.1. Doctors have proven that smoking takes an average of 11 minutes off your life every cigarette you smoke.


No.2. Smoking not only harms the smokers, but the people around them as well. When the people around the smokers inhale the smoke, they harm their lungs. Inhaling the smoke exhaled by a smoker is known as passive smoking.

No.3. Smokers can also contract lung cancer from smoking.


No.4. The smoke can travel from place to place. Sometimes, people are unaware of the smoke coming towards them, since they can't smell it. They will inhale it anyway. Breathing even just a little bit of tabacco is harmful.

No.5. Your teeth get yellow.

No.6. Your breath will get bad.

No.7. It's not truly pleasant for anyone, whether they are smokers or passive smokers. Yes, people might find that the flavour/taste of the cigarettes is pleasant, but it affects the smokers' health in the bad way. You should know that it’s not just affecting your appetite in the good way that counts, but the way it affects your health. For something to be truly pleasant, it has to affect your health and appetite in the good way.

Sources:
http://news.bbc.co.uk...
http://www.health.gov.au...
http://www.quitnow.gov.au...
http://pediatrics.about.com...
http://www.drchetan.com...
http://answers.yahoo.com...;

Debate Round No. 1
Flipbook

Con

It is in America because I was debating for the UK against Kellan01. You came along and vote bombed. I know you don't live in America, but I do, and I was the one getting vote bombed while I was debating for the UK.

My opponent drops arguments relating to the health of people.
I think that none of these point to completely banning cigarettes.

1. Where is your source for this?
2. How does this relate to completely banning cigarettes, you could ban them in public areas, and you don't face the problems that
3. We all know this you don't have to say it again, but we already have rehabilitation centers and smoke-free programs. We can't ban something that harms the safety of themselves, it is not threatening to the public as a whole.
4. Have you smelled cigarette smoke? It is really easy to smell. Your talking like we should ban crappy houses because they are disgusting to look at, don't you know the freedoms that America has and was made for?
5. The people who smoke probably don't care about your teeth. Again, we can't ban things that make you look like crap! We can't go and ban nose-rings and stuff.
6. Listen to arguments 4 and 5, we can't ban stuff that makes you look and smell like crap. People have their freedoms. We can't go banning diapers because they aren't pleasing to see. Also, how does number 6 hurt your health?
7. Appetite? APPETITE? We all know cigarettes affect your health in a bad way, but APPETITE??!?!? Please explain how a cigarette is a food.

All of your sources are off topic...

My arguments.

1. Freedoms of America

Freedom; The right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.

https://www.google.com...

Banning Cigarettes Is Restraint

Instead, tax them largely, increase smoke-free areas, support smoke-free campaigns, and encourage people to stand up to smokers. Give them a hard time, and you have the end result of abolishing cigarettes, without putting hindrance or restraint on people. People will still get cigarettes illegally if you ban them, but if you crack down on them as I said above, you abolish them and keep away illegal trafficking and manufacturing

2. Drugs affect the mind so bad that people will KILL FOR DRUGS. So think about how hard it is for cigarettes to be completely abolished by banning.

I await a response in round two, The end argument don't post any arguments or rebuttal, because you went first.
sweetbreeze

Pro

1. The source was right there, the first one.
2. As I said in No.4., even if people don't smoke in the public, the smell could travel from place to place and people will inhale it anyway, without even smelling it.
3. "...it is not threatening to to the public as a whole." It is. It's harmful to the environment. Because people keep cutting down trees without knowing how to make it grow back again, we're running out of trees by the minute. We don't have enough trees to breathe in the carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen. If we lack oxygen, we won't have enough clean air and it will cause Global Warming. The Earth will start heating up and soon, our planet will be too hot for anything to live!
4. Sometimes you can't smell it. I've been educated, you know. It's not like I'm using fibs in my arguments. It can happen.
5. "The people who smoke probably don't care about your teeth." You should have used "their" instead of "your". Nose rings are different. Cigarettes are a drug.
6. Diapers are different. Cigarettes are drugs. Of course they hurt your health. Over 440,000 people from the USA and 100,000 people from the UK die each year because of smoking. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...;
7. When I say appetite, I mean, the flavour/taste of the cigarettes. I'm not saying they're food or anything.

"All of your sources are off topic..." Why? They're the sources I used for my arguments.

"Freedom of America" You can't risk your life just for freedom. I'm not saying that the people can't get their freedom, but I'm saying that you can't risk your life just to keep using a harmful drug, which is harmful to both people and the environment. People, as in smokers and passive smokers.

"Drugs affect the mind so bad that people will KILL FOR DRUGS." That is why people shouldn't use them. "So think about how hard it is for cigarettes to be completely abolished by banning." It's hard, so that's why people created nicorette. Yes, both cigarettes and nicorette have nicotine, but nicotine itself is not harmful. It's the tobacco in the cigarettes that are harmful. If people get addicted to the nicorette, they'll forget about the cigarettes. Well, it only works for some people. And there's another thing that they use called nicotine patches. http://www.netdoctor.co.uk...;

You got anything to say, Con?
Debate Round No. 2
Flipbook

Con

Flipbook forfeited this round.
sweetbreeze

Pro

Er, I'll take that as a no.

I'd like to thank my opponent for debating me.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Sandy8 4 years ago
Sandy8
I completely agree that cigarettes should become illegal because not only are they harmful to the smokers, but the people around them.

Or maybe there should be a special location in the community for smokers only if they are willing to risk their lives. Just because one person wants to smoke, doesn't mean 20 other people should be forced to breathe the same air.

If there was a place where people can go to smoke (if they really, truly want to risk their health like that), then that would solve the problem of innocent people suffering the side affects of smoking, but until a solution is made to the problem of smoking, it should become illegal.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Mikal 4 years ago
Mikal
FlipbooksweetbreezeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Sigh. Con had the debate won and was right when he said Pro was off topic, and did not even focus on this from a legal standpoint. However conduct to PRO due to FF.
Vote Placed by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
FlipbooksweetbreezeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited and Pro used more sources.