The Instigator
runnersva1
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
LaL36
Con (against)
Winning
26 Points

Legalization of marijuana

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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 6 votes the winner is...
LaL36
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,945 times Debate No: 28115
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (43)
Votes (6)

 

runnersva1

Pro

The legalization of marijuana has been debated for years now. However, one big factor about this argument is that we live in a democracy. How is something considered "illegal" if the government is for the people/ by the people? The definition of a democracy is:

Noun
1. A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

On the site http://civilliberty.about.com... the 7 reasons why marijuana is illegal are listed like so:
1. It is perceived as an addictive.
2. It has "no accepted medical use".
3. It has been historically linked with narcotics, such as heroin.
4. It is associated with unfashionable lifestyles.
5. It was once associated with oppressed ethnic groups.
6. Inertia is a powerful force in public policy.
7. Advocates for marijuana legalization rarely present an appealing case.

All of these reasons may be true, but they are solely opinions, as well. If someone wants to put this substance into their body, they should be able to without the governemnt controlling their intake. Approximately 8,400 state prison inmates were serving time for marijuana possession (any amount), and fewer than half of them were first time offenders. These people can receive one year in prison to ten years in prison, plus they are required to pay a fine typically. The sentence depends on whether it was a misdemeanor or felony possession.

For drugs? You will sentence someone and take part of thier life away for drugs? In my opinion, that is ridiculous. The drugs will continue to be sold, used, and abused whether you fine and sentence the users and dealers or not. However, based on the foundation of our governemnt, the United States of America is a free country. Therefore, why aren't we allowed to take drugs? Because it harms our body? Really? Well, "the American Medical Association argued against marijuana prohibition in the 1930s, citing its therapeutic potential. But the bureau made its case that marijuana was "dangerous for the mind and the body," and the federal government outlawed its use in 1937. It wasn't until the 1970s that a campaign began to restore marijuana's therapeutic reputation, and in 1996 California became the first state to legalize cannabis for medicinal purposes. Psychiatrist Tod Mikuriya, a founding father in the medical marijuana movement, claimed that cannabis has none of the adverse side effects of opiates. 'In fact,' he said, 'it really enhances both quality of life and rehabilitation.'"

Typical people fighting against marijuana have never used the drug. Therefore, their opinion is irreleveant. There is no proof that users become
"a fiend with savage or 'caveman' tendencies. His sex desires are aroused, and some of the most horrible crimes result."

If people were walking around being cannibals, we'd have a problem. But guess what? They aren't. According to NIDA's 2011 Monitoring the Future study, about 7.2 percent of 8th graders, 17.6 percent of 10th graders, and 22.6 percent of 12th graders had used marijuana in the month before the survey. In fact, marijuana use declined from the late 1990s through 2007, with a decrease in past-year use of more than 20 percent in all three grades combined from 2000 to 2007. Unfortunately, this trend appears to be reversing. Since 2006, annual, monthly, and daily marijuana use increased among 10th and 12th graders. In 2011, 6.6 percent of 12th graders reported using marijuana daily, compared to 5.0 percent in 2006.

Are all these kids reckless and exhibiting such canibal-like behavior? No.

Marijuana should be legal for the simple reason that we live in a free country, and if someone chooses to intake a drug, they should be able to without the governemnt making decisions for them.

Alcohol is legal. Sex is legal. Cigarettes are legal. Why aren't drugs? This is a free country. Your opinions do not matter because if a percentage of the population disagrees, then it should be legal anyway. FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE. The rest of the population that is against the usage can just not use it. Why jeopardize everyone else's lives and decisions? The government should not be this involved in our lives. We decide things for ourselves. This is not a dictatorship. This is a democracy. If you like being controlled by the governemnt, by all means, move to Libya!

Sources:
http://mobile.getsmartaboutdrugs.com...

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

http://www.mahalo.com...

http://teens.drugabuse.gov...
LaL36

Con

Good luck

My opponents main argument is that America is a democracy and a free country and therefore drugs should be legal. Now, I am not aware of any countrywide polls on drug legislation but on this site, it is 50-50. You need to realize that America is not completely free. Based on your logic, why should their be any laws? Why can't people steal and kill? The obvious answer is that it significantly harms people. And as we know, drugs have significantly harmed this country. http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu...


"All of these reasons may be true, but they are solely opinions, as well."

The only one that is an opinion, is number 7. The rest strengthened my argument.



"You will sentence someone and take part of thier life away for drugs? In my opinion, that is ridiculous. The drugs will continue to be sold, used, and abused whether you fine and sentence the users and dealers or not."

First of all they broke a widely accepted law. Second of all, answer this question even though I knoe that you can't: can you explain to me how is it physically possible for someone sell, use, or abuse drugs in prison where they are under surveillance?

"American Medical Association argued against marijuana prohibition...."

Medical marijuana is a separate topic. This is about overdosing and abusing drugs so that whole paragraph is irrelevant.

"Typical people fighting against marijuana have never used the drug. Therefore, their opinion is irreleveant."

Let me ask you a question: have you ever had marijuanna? I assume not. If so, then why isn't your opinion irrelevant? Once again, the obvious answer is, you do not need to use the drug in order to know its bad effects on society.

"If people were walking around being cannibals, we'd have a problem. But guess what? They aren't."

Try again http://www.mirror.co.uk...

Even if there weren't you yourself admitted several times in the debate that drugs are a problem

1. It is perceived as an addictive.
2. It has "no accepted medical use".
3. It has been historically linked with narcotics, such as heroin.
4. It is associated with unfashionable lifestyles.
5. It was once associated with oppressed ethnic groups.
6. Inertia is a powerful force in public policy.

"All of these maybe true"
You have contradicted yourself.

Alcohol is legal because it is fine under moderation. Drinking and driving isn't. Cigarettes are legal because it only harms yourself and not others and definitely not as much as drugs. Sex is legal because otherwise the pro would not be debating right now. So these are not good examples because they are not related to drugs.

Thank for starting the debate. I look forward to your response. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
runnersva1

Pro

Alright, last time I listed the 7 reasons why many argue against the legalization of marijuana, and this time, I promise I will not contradict myself.
So, let's begin with 8 reasons why people say marijuana SHOULD be legalized, shall we?
1. The government has no right to enforce marijuana laws.
"There are always reasons why laws exist. While some advocates for the status quo claim that marijuana laws prevent people from harming themselves, the most common rationale is that they prevent people from harming themselves and from causing harm to the larger culture. But laws against self-harm always stand on shaky ground"predicated, as they are, on the idea that the government knows what's good for you better than you do"and no good ever comes from making governments the guardians of culture."

2. Enforcement of marijuana laws is racially discriminatory.
"Racism was part of the charge against marijuana, as newspapers in 1934 editorialized: "Marijuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men"s shadows and look at a white woman twice."

3. Enforcement of marijuana laws is prohibitively expensive.
"Six years ago, Milton Friedman and a group of over 500 economists advocated for marijuana legalization on the basis that prohibition directly costs more than $7.7 billion per year."

4. Enforcement of marijuana laws is unnecessarily cruel.
"You don't have to look very hard to find examples of lives needlessly destroyed by marijuana prohibition laws. The government arrests over 700,000 Americans, more than the population of Wyoming, for marijuana possession every year. These new "convicts" are driven from their jobs and families, and pushed into a prison system that turns first-time offenders into hardened criminals."

5. Marijuana laws impede legitimate criminal justice goals.
"Just as alcohol prohibition essentially created the American Mafia, marijuana prohibition has created an underground economy where crimes unrelated to marijuana, but connected to people who sell and use it, go unreported. End result: real crimes become harder to solve."

6. Marijuana laws cannot be consistently enforced.
"Every year, an estimated 2.4 million people use marijuana for the first time. Most will never be arrested for it; a small percentage, usually low-income people of color, arbitrarily will. If the objective of marijuana prohibition laws is to actually prevent marijuana use rather than driving it underground, then the policy is, despite its astronomical cost, an utter failure from a pure law enforcement point of view."

7. Taxing marijuana can be profitable.
"A recent Fraser Institute study found that legalizing and taxing marijuana could produce considerable revenue."

8. Alcohol and tobacco, though legal, are far more harmful than marijuana.
"I have written in the past that the case for tobacco prohibition is actually much stronger than the case for marijuana prohibition. Alcohol prohibition has, of course, already been tried - and, judging by the history of the War on Drugs, legislators have apparently learned nothing from this failed experiment."

The first point I'd like to elaborate on is the fact that marijuana ruins lives. Millions of people have been sent to jail for possession of a drug. The definition of a drug is a substance that has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body, in particular.

Let's analyze this with a made-up, but realistic, situation...
Johnny is a good guy, and he always has been. He's 30 years old, and he's a hard worker. However, one day, he receives a call that his father died. This situation gives him a thought, "I'm 30 years old, and I've never smoked weed a day in my life." So, he decides to try it. He got the realization from his father's death that life is short, so he wants to "live a little". BUT WAIT. He can't because the government says so.
He could either always wonder, or he could try it. Either way, Johnny is punished because the "government says so". Do you know what Johnny does? He's a lawyer. If he works a little longer and gets bigger roles in the government, he, too, could be apart of the law-making government. Guess what? Johnny is a regular guy, and so are the men and women in the government.

So these regular people are making decisions for Johnny? Let me ask you one thing. Is your name Johnny? No. Therefore, you should not be able to make decisions for Johnny. As long as he isn't causing public disturbances, keeps a clean record, and doesn't cause physical harm to anyone.. Johnny should be able to make his own decisions, including placing the substances of his choice into his body.

Now, number 6 on my list states that marijuana regulation cannot be completely regulated, and number 3 on my list addresses the money issue. So basically, in summary, the government is wasting money on punishing people like Johnny for something that millions of people get away with. Sending someone to jail for putting something in their body... Why does the government care so much? Can you answer that? Let's be real here. If the citizen is cooperative and maintains an impeccable record, hell, let them smoke the weed! If they aren't causing a public disturbance, the government shouldn't be involved.
Their job is to keep us safe, not create a dictatorship. The definition of dictate is to lay down authoritatively; prescribe: "attempts to dictate policy"; "the right to dictate to me".

The government's job is not to dictate my life or make decisions for me. To a certain degree, such a safety, they should regulate the decisions of citizens. However, where does it end? They're controlling children's school lunches, who we marry, what we do or do not put in our bodies.. What's next? Are they going to put surveillance cameras in our houses because hey, that'd solve the problem of not being able to regulate crimes, wouldn't it?

NO. WE LIVE IN A FREE COUNTRY. IF I WANT TO SMOKE WEED, I HAVE THE RIGHT.

Throughout history it HAS been legal. "Marijuana has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it"s been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7,000 B.C. and it was legal as recently as when Ronald Reagan was a boy."

Why now? Why is the government taking so much action in our lives? People get their rebellious attitudes because the government gives them a reason to! If you take someone's rights away, THEY WILL REBEL. THEY WILL FIGHT BACK. Do you remember the Civil War and the women's rights movement? The African Americans and women didn't sit back and let he government control them. They fought back.. Against slavery! Against discrimination! Against the government and their "say so" on their lives!

This law effects everyone because even if you do not smoke marijuana, if you wanted to.. You couldn't because it's illegal.

Let's just say that Johnny chose to smoke that night. You only live once, right? Well, turns out that his friend Bill, the cop, decided to drop by that night. Bill smelled the marijuana the second he pulled up to the house, so he arrested Johnny right on the spot. He took an oath as a police officer, so he had to.

That night, Johnny called his wife who was visiting her mother in Florida, and he told her he was in jail for possession. Their lives weren't ever the same again.

After he was released, Johnny was a different man. His "good guy" image had changed when he was behind bars. The people he was around, the violence, and the atmosphere gave him a whole new attitude. When Johnny got out, he got into the drug business, thinking he wouldn't get caught.

Jail changed him. That night when he smoked weed, he was alright. He was just a regular guy doing his own thing, making his own decisions. Maybe he wouldn't have gotten into the drug business if marijuana wasn't illegal, and he didn't do to jail.

http://civilliberty.about.com...
http://www.drugwarrant.com...
LaL36

Con

Thank you for your response.

Pro has forfeited that her argument is was flawed and did not rebute any of my points, but rather, presented new arguments.

1. The government has every right to enforce laws. How else do you expect for it to stop.

2. How is enforcing laws on the entire country of all races, racist?

3. Taxing marijuanna will be expensive.

4. Enforcing laws is not cruel. There is no benefit for taking unperscribed marijuanna. It only does harm.

5. While I do agree on this point, drug addicts will take a lot more marijuanna knowing that it is legal

6. Neither can kills and robberies and all other crimes.

7. Irrelevant.

8. Alcohol is fine under moderation. Tobacco is just bad for your health but it doesn't get inside your head. And even though what you said is true that doesn't mean marijuana isn't harmful.

The rest of my opponents argument is mainly that enforcing marijuana has ruined lives. My opponent neglects to mention why these people go through this experience. Because they made the decision to take drugs. Marijuana is not neccessary and does only harm. Based on your story, you seem to say marijuana is a neccessary part of one's life and the government is sinning for depriving the country from it. I kindly ask my opponent to wake up and look at the terrible things that marijuana has caused.
http://www.drugabuse.gov...

"So basically, in summary, the government is wasting money on punishing people like Johnny for something that millions of people get away with."

So therefore Johnny should not be punished. If people get away with murder, does that mean all of sudden we should make killing legal? And I think it is definitely not a "waste of time" because look at the results. http://www.cnbc.com...

"Why does the government care so much?"

I am starting to get the feeling you want to take marijuana. But ask and you shall recieve.
http://www.freep.com...


"Their job is to keep us safe"

If you look at the sources I provided as to what marijuana has caused, the government would be doing a damn good job keeping us safe from this by enforcing laws.

"The government's job is not to dictate my life or make decisions for me."

You still fail to understand that inevery democracy, there is limits and laws. Move to Somalia if you don't
want laws. Killing is an example of a limit along with stealing.

"NO. WE LIVE IN A FREE COUNTRY. IF I WANT TO SMOKE WEED, I HAVE THE RIGHT."

Refer to what I said above and I would like to point out that you contradicted yourself again because this entire debate is how you don't have the right to do so. Pro also broke a promise and should lose conduct for that. "I promise I will not contradict myself."

"Do you remember the Civil War and the women's rights movement? The African Americans and women didn't sit back and let he government control them. They fought back.. Against slavery! Against discrimination!"

I can't believe a rational human being is saying enforcing marijuana is like enforcing slavery. I hope you can take a hint that they are not the same. If not I feel bad for you but I will kindly elaborate.

"After he was released, Johnny was a different man"

Proves why Johnny shouldn't have taken drugs. Your point just strengthened my argument.

"Maybe he wouldn't have gotten into the drug business if marijuana wasn't illegal, and he didn't do to jail."

There would be no need for the drug business because it would be legal. You are using circular logic. You are saying drugs being ilegal are bad because people become part of the drug business.
Debate Round No. 2
runnersva1

Pro

1. Yes the government has every right to enforce laws, but it's important to control which laws should or should not be imposed. Enforcing a drug law is completely irrational. The government has no right to control what citizens of the country put into their bodies. It's completely irrelevant to what our country stands for, in my opinion. How can the government dictate what we do to our bodies? Try giving me a logical explanation to why the government had the right to control our lives to this extent. Yes, there are dangers, but there are dangers to everything! There are side effects to just about every drug, prescription and over the counter, but they're legal. Alcohol and cigarette smoking are just as equally destructive. In fact, DUIs are very prevalent. Drinking under the influence takes 10,000 lives of people in the USA per year. Alcohol is still legal, and honestly, I think there'd be just as many issues in the world if alcohol was illegal. If people want to harm themselves and do crazy things, they don't let the government stop them. They find ways, so your argument regarding "how do you expect for it to stop" has just been proved wrong because in your article http://www.drugabuse.gov... it states that 42% of 12th graders have used marijuana in their lifetime, so obviously this law hasn't given much effect to these people. They don't care. If they want to do it, they'll do it. It's a drug. It's much easily hidden than killing someone. Do you know why? Because it is not an easily regulated law! Therefore, it's useless. Things like DUI, rape, and murder are much easily regulated because the evidence is not easily hidden.
2. Marijuana was seen as a racism contributor because a newspaper wrote
"Again, racism was part of the charge against marijuana, as newspapers in 1934 editorialized: 'Marijuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men"s shadows and look at a white woman twice.'"
Once this article came out, it started many new issues. Many believed that people wanted to make marijuana illegal because it was causing African Americans to disrespect or feel superior to white people. This article proved to be very controversial and arose many new issues to the table regarding making marijuana illegal.
3. It's more expensive if it's illegal! "Washington state"s war on marijuana has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars over the last decade. Every one of Washington"s 39 counties has spent millions of dollars enforcing these laws."
Taxing marijuana would solve those issues. But hey, if it's taxed, maybe it'll decrease the usage too. That's what happened with cigarettes, right? People finally realized...
$5.50 per day gives a monthly average of $165.00 spent on cigarettes. If, instead of spending it on cigarettes, you were to just save that $165.00 every month in a cookie jar where it earned no interest whatsoever, you would have the following:
$9,900 in five years.
$19,800 in ten years.
$39,600 in twenty years.

Of the 45 million Americans who smoke, 70 percent say they want to quit. From 2000 to 2011, total consumption of all combustible tobacco decreased from 450.7 billion cigarette equivalents to 326.6, a 27.5% decrease; per capita consumption of all combustible tobacco products declined from 2,148 to 1,374, a 36.0% decrease.

Taxing, educating, etc. helps. Making something illegal makes people want what they can't have even more.
Mike Moffatt says, "I suspect that marijuana is appealing to some people precisely because it is illegal; humans have been tempted by the "forbidden fruit" since the time of Adam and Eve. It's possible that once marijuana has been legal for a period of time, it will no longer be seen as "cool" and demand will drop off."
4. Enforcing laws is cruel when the law is so contradictory. The majority of people agree that killing is wrong, even the murders know it! But a drug.. Please. It is the decision of each individual to make regarding what substances they want to put in their bodies, not the government's. The Quinnipiac University poll finds that 51 percent of New Yorkers support the legalization of marijuana, while only 44 percent oppose it. Voters 65 and older were the one age group opposed to a change in the law, so that means the majority of people disagree with the enforcement of this law.
5. Refer back to number 3 because you are incorrect. The temptation for something illegal makes the product used more than it is as a legal product.
One source says, "There is no good evidence that prohibition decreases drug use, and there are several theories that suggest prohibition might actually increase drug use (i.e. the "forbidden fruit" effect, and easier accessibility for youth). One unintended effect of marijuana prohibition is that marijuana is very popular in American high schools. Why? Because it is available. You don't have to be 21 to buy marijuana -- marijuana dealers usually don't care how old you are as long as you have money. It is actually easier for many high school students to obtain marijuana than it is for them to obtain alcohol, because alcohol is legal and therefore regulated to keep it away from kids. If our goal is to reduce drug consumption, then we should focus on open and honest programs to educate youth, regulation to keep drugs away from kids, and treatment programs for people with drug problems. But the current prohibition scheme does not allow such reasonable approaches to marijuana; instead we are stuck with 'DARE' police officers spreading lies about drugs in schools, and policies that result in jail time rather than treatment for people with drug problems. We tried prohibition with alcohol, and that failed miserably. We should be able to learn our lesson and stop repeating the same mistake. SUMMARY: Prohibition does not work. Education and treatment are better ways to address the drug problem."
6. (Marijuana Use Prevalence 2011) "In 2011, marijuana was the most commonly used illicit drug, with 18.1 million current users. It was used by 80.5 percent of current illicit drug users. About two thirds (64.3 percent) of illicit drug users used only marijuana in the past month. Also, in 2011, 8.0 million persons aged 12 or older were current users of illicit drugs other than marijuana (or 35.7 percent of illicit drug users aged 12 or older). Current use of other drugs but not marijuana was reported by 19.5 percent of illicit drug users, and 16.2 percent of illicit drug users reported using both marijuana and other drugs." Compare the numbers of usage to reported cases. It's very irregularly monitored.

There's a distinct difference between murder and marijuana usage. A source claims his opinion as this:
The first and most basic reason that marijuana should be legal is that there is no good reason for it not to be legal. Some people ask 'why should marijuana be legalized?" but we should ask "Why should marijuana be illegal?" From a philosophical point of view, individuals deserve the right to make choices for themselves. The government only has a right to limit those choices if the individual's actions endanger someone else. This does not apply to marijuana, since the individual who chooses to use marijuana does so according to his or her own free will. The government also may have a right to limit individual actions if the actions pose a significant threat to the individual. But this argument does not logically apply to marijuana because marijuana is far less dangerous than some drugs which are legal, such as alcohol and tobacco.
I wasn't comparing marijuana prohibition to slavery. I was comparing the government's constant unnecessary rule over our lives.
An assumption regarding myself trying or not trying is irrelevant.

http://www.madd.org...
http://www.drugwarrant.com...
http://www.aclu-wa.org...
http://www.cdc.gov...
LaL36

Con

1. The government prohibiting drug use is not controlling ones life. What are the benefits to marijuana? My opponent said perscripted drugs are legal and they have side effects, so why isn't marijuana legal? The obvious answer is that there are benefits to PERSCRIPTED drugs such as healing you. Answer me another question even though I know that you can't. What significant benefits does marijuana provide?

"your argument regarding "how do you expect for it to stop" has just been proved wrong because in your article http://www.drugabuse.gov...... it states that 42% of 12th graders have used marijuana in their lifetime, so obviously this law hasn't given much effect to these people."

It has not been proved wrong. It was a question that you did not answer. If Marijuana was legalized even more people will be taking and therefore it would not be stopped and my argument has not in fact been proved wrong.

2. How? I don't understand what marijuana has to do with racism.

3. It also costs money to enforce many other crimes does that mean we should stop enforcing them? My opponent also mentioned that people wouldn't want marijuana if it was legal. What about alcohol if alcohol is worse and it's legal why a people so addicted to it?

4. It is scientifically proven that marijuana is bad for you. They are just so addicted, they don't want to admit they have a problem.

5. If you believe I am incorrect answer me this even though you obviously can't How can someone who can't stop taking drugs when it is illegal, how is it possible for him to stop all of sudden if it's legal.

6. Irrelevant

"I wasn't comparing marijuana prohibition to slavery."

"Do you remember the Civil War and the women's rights movement? The African Americans and women didn't sit back and let he government control them. They fought back.. Against slavery! Against discrimination!"

Than can you explain to me what you were doing?

I'd like to make clear that my opponent has disregarded number 8 and most of my argument after that. I apologize for not using sources I didn't feel they were needed. If my opponent feels I should've please tell me in the next round.
Debate Round No. 3
runnersva1

Pro

I didn't respond to some points because I ran out of word count.
1. Benefits to marijuana are irrelevant because it is someone's choice what they want to put into their own bodies. If they aren't harming others, it shouldn't be illegal. Marijuana may not be beneficial, but that is besides the point because the main point I'm trying to make is that if it doesn't hurt OTHERS, a person should have the ability to decide if they want to hurt themselves.. Free will. The government shouldn't have any control over our free will.
2. Racism contributes to the prejudicial court system. Black males were jailed six times more than white males as of 2007, and black men are 11.8 times more likely than white men to be incarcerated for drug use or possession.
3. People are going to be addicted either way. The main point (I repeat) is that it is a person's choice whether they should do drugs or not, not the government's. And it costs more money when marijuana is illegal, so why are we wasting money on something that shouldn't even be illegal? For protection? Because people do it anyway, so what the hell are we protecting?
4 and 5. And? That's their problem. People have the right to be addicted if they please. People in our nation are obese. Making school lunches healthier doesn't stop students from buying bags or chips and pigging out at home, just like making something illegal doesn't make the product less easy to obtain. It's a worthless cause because it wastes money and doesn't really help anyone because like you said, how does anything help an addict if they are already addicted? If they want to, so what? It's their life. Who the hell are you or the government to dictate someone else's life? Again, if they aren't harming anyone, then leave them alone! Let it be legal.
6. It's very irrelevant because the percentage of usage compared to the percentage of people who are caught is a HUGE difference. People still do it. People still get away with it. People don't care. So why waste the time making an effort to make them care? They obviously don't and won't. The law was made to help protect people. Well guess what, it isn't protecting anyone because the percentages for usage are higher than ever (no pun intended).

I was comparing the government's constant rule to our free will. The government consistently tries to control our lives. Slavery was a huge problem, denying women of their rights was a problem, and now, denying citizens of their free will to do drugs is a problem. Drugs are drugs. Whoever wants to do them should be able to without the government sending users and sellers to jail. Lives are wasted in jail over something as silly as that. It's each citizen's prerogative to decide what they want to do to their bodies and with their lives.
8. It doesn't matter if marijuana is harmful. Again (I'll say it as many times as I need to) it's a person's decision if they want to increase their heart rate etc, etc with a drug.

Use sources. If you don't, you aren't backing up your information, so you'll lose credit for that. Also, if you don't back up your information, all words can be perceived as an opinion. Opinions only make up half of a debate.
LaL36

Con

1. Benefits are relavent because you made up a whole story about Johnny and about how the government is evil for depriving him of it. "If they aren't harming others, it shouldn't be illegal."
They are, therefore it should. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com...
So the government should just allow this to occur and legalize marijuana?

2. I still don't understand. Just because blacks were jailed what does that have to do with the law itself? The law was intended for all races and religions.

3. "People are going to be addicted either way." You are strengthening my argument. I they are going to be addicted either way legalizing it would not solve the problem. You have forfeited that legalizing marijuana will not stop the addiction. "Because people do it anyway, so what the hell are we protecting?"
It is sad you are unaware of the resolution but I will explain it to you. They are trying to stop the use of marijuana because of the deaths it has caused to others. You have no argument for benefits to marijuana because you have already admitted that users will be addicted either way.

4. "Making school lunches healthier doesn't stop students from buying bags or chips and pigging out at home" while this is a very unrelated example, at that moment when they are eating the healthy school lunch they are not pigging out so they are benefiting. "just like making something illegal doesn't make the product less easy to obtain." Yes it does! In every way. Just because America hasn't been doing a good job enforcing it, that doesn't mean they haven't caught people. You were arguing and complaing how so many people get caught and their lives get ruined, it has had an impact. (I am using my opponent's argument as a source).
"how does anything help an addict if they are already addicted?"

I don't remember saying this I don't think I did. And to answer that, physical therapy, not letting them have access to it, and uh.. Oh yeah make it ilegal!

"Again, if they aren't harming anyone, then leave them alone!"

AGAIN, refer to the sources I gave you in this round and in previous rounds which proves that it is harming others. This argument of yours has been disproven in round 1 move on.

"So why waste the time making an effort to make them care? They obviously don't and won't."

That has nothing to do with the basis of the law but how strong the law is. We should make them care. We should not disregard a law simply because people "don't care".

"denying citizens of their free will to do drugs is a problem."

Okay for the third time I will determine the difference between your examples and drugs. Woman's rights: we are depriving women of the BENEFIT of voting and other rights. Slavery: we are depriving people of the BENEFIT of freedom (with limits and laws!). Marijuana: We are depriving people something that harms them and others. This sounds great. There are no benefits to marijuana that is why they are different therefore, your examples of slavery, women's rights... Is unrelated to this debate.

8. Okay I will use that against you. My opponent admitted marijuana is harmful and you forgot to mention that I have proved that in fact, marijuana has harmed others whereas my opponent claimed marijuana has not harmed and therefore should be legal. Another argument disproved.

"Use sources. If you don't, you aren't backing up your information, so you'll lose credit for that. Also, if you don't back up your information, all words can be perceived as an opinion. Opinions only make up half of a debate."

My opponent is vague and hypocritical. My opponent has not used one source this round. I don't think I have said something in the last round as a fact and not state sources. My opponent, on the other hand, said something as a fact and provided no evidence. "The law was made to help protect people. Well guess what, it isn't protecting anyone because the percentages for usage are higher than ever"

Sounds liked you said that as a fact with no source. I would also like to make clear that I have used my opponents argument as a source.
Debate Round No. 4
runnersva1

Pro

runnersva1 forfeited this round.
LaL36

Con

Conclusion

1. My opponent should lose conduct for forfeiting and I urge a vote for con for convincing argument because my round 4 argument has not been rebutted.

2. My round one argument has not even been addressed, another factor for loss of conduct for my opponent and and her argument.

3. Do not be fooled by the fact that since my opponent used more sources she should win that part because I used sources when ever it was necessary. My opponent on the other hand, as I have pointed out, said something as a fact and did not provide sources.

4. Pro has forfeited that marijuana is bad.

5. Pro has forfeited that government has every right to enforce the law.

6. Pro has forfeited that her round 1 argument, her main argument, is flawed.

7. Pro has forfeited that marijuana harms other people and that it ruins lives.

Pro basically dismantled her whole argument with no help needed from me. I just brought this to awareness. I thank my opponent for partially debating although I wish she hadn't forfeited. I also would like to thank the voters for reading this relatively long debate.
Debate Round No. 5
43 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by LaL36 3 years ago
LaL36
@yarley I kind of agree with you but most people before a debate say forfeit is automatic loss and automatic 7 points. In my opinion, if there is a forfeit, the other person should get conduct and argument because their argument went unrefuted.
Posted by Yarely 3 years ago
Yarely
Honestly I don't see how it's fair that all the votes are straight 7's even though Pro just forfeited one round.
Isn't it only conduct that gets discounted?

I thought Pro's arguments were much more consistent and strong.
That should count for something
Posted by runnersva1 3 years ago
runnersva1
Id like to say one more thing. If you make marijuana legal, you give people free will. If it's illegal, the "good people" and good acts aren't really good because they're being forced to make the good choices. Whereas if it's legal, and people choose to not do drugs, they are the truly smart ones. Most people say "I'm not doing it because it's illegal". Well how about "I'm not doing it because it's wrong?" We are teaching people the wrong thing. Let them have the opportunity and suffer the consequences if they choose to do so. People will never learn to be truly good if all things "bad" are illegal. In reference to a religious story of Adam and Eve. God gave Eve the temptation because He gave her free will. Without this free will, they wouldn't truly be showing their love to God. It wouldn't be real.
Posted by runnersva1 3 years ago
runnersva1
On this? Haven't I worn down enough people?
Posted by LaL36 3 years ago
LaL36
@runnersva1 why don't you debate again. It seems that is what you are doing now.
Posted by runnersva1 3 years ago
runnersva1
I understand that certain influences can cause destruction to people's lives. Believe me, I've had quite a few life experiences that have helped me to understand this fact very clearly. However, there's only so much we can do, but ultimately, it's the choice of the citizen to decide what to do with their lives regarding drugs, alcohol, decision-making, religion choice, etc. They choose the lifestyle they wish to live, not us. That is what I truly believe. Yes, it is very very unfortunate for the children who are exposed to their parents' bad decisions. But our generation is stubborn, so whether we try to help them of not, those same people would have been tempted to try something else if not marijuana that's just as worse. We just have to trust that people will make good choices. And if they don't, there's really nothing we can do to stop them except to stop them if they cause harm to others. Guns cause direct harm to others, but they aren't illegal. In fact, they cause more direct harm than marijuana. Marijuana is a choice. A choice citizens, I believe, should make, not the government.
Posted by Alyssajayde 3 years ago
Alyssajayde
@runnersva1
Your opinion is your own as everyone else's is although I still completely disagree With all that you have said. Firstly abortion - yes, the mother may have a health problem or didn't have enough money to support the baby although many women are unable to have babies and want to adopt a baby so why kill the baby when a couple would be bald to support and care for it as their own. Marijuana may be what you call "someone's choice" although you need to think about the bigger picture. They wouldn't be leading a good example for their children ( if they had any ) and if the smoker got sick, which is likely to happen their family and friends would be in distress if that sickness led to death. If they had children they'd grow up without a mother/father of even both! The family and friends would be in brief and their lives would change significantly because of the legalisation of marijuana. Do you still think that it should be legal? All these things have caused horrible disasters and not just one person would be affected by the smokers idiotic choice to smoke marijuana but many.
Posted by tmar19652 3 years ago
tmar19652
So someone kills you and your entire family, but utter freedom dictates that they cannot be placed in jail. Sounds great! So that argument for legalization does not hold up.
Posted by runnersva1 3 years ago
runnersva1
I can see both sides to the argument, but recently, I have been leaning more towards utter freedom. The government shouldn't be involved.. If someone wants to smoke pot, that is their personal decision. Abortions have always been something I've been borderline on, but you don't know the mother's situation. At all. I have been a victim of something like that before, and if the mother is completely traumatized or her health is unable to support a baby, she has the right to get an abortion. Some people's bodies cants support pregnancies. Therefore, abortions should be legal. And marijuana "ruins lives" and "is dangerous to the health". Well, okay. That's not your choice. Actually, it should be your choice! We the people hold be able to choose what to be put in our bodies. The government shouldn't be able to make that decision for us. It's our choice whether we want to kill brain cells. If the person isn't causing harm to others, let them do drugs. I, not saying they're healthy, but it's their choice! Not the government's.
Posted by Alyssajayde 3 years ago
Alyssajayde
@runnersva1
Your previous comment was a very thoughtless thing to say. Yes, I agree that gay marriage should be legal because it isn't harming anyone and people were born that way so there's no reason it should've been illegal in the first place. Abortions and marijuana on the other hand should both be illegal. Abortions should be illegal because it kills and destroys an innocent baby who could've been something great one day and made an impact in the world. Marijuana ruins lives, harms their health in many way and in the way they act. This is clearly what shouldn't be legalised EVER...
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by RationalMadman 3 years ago
RationalMadman
runnersva1LaL36Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: She insulted me in a PM then forfeits, and terribly displays anything well past round one. Go to hell.
Vote Placed by Yarely 3 years ago
Yarely
runnersva1LaL36Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had a lot stronger points while Con's points were extremely irrelevant and were proven wrong multiple times. But Conduct to Con since Pro FF
Vote Placed by drafterman 3 years ago
drafterman
runnersva1LaL36Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Firewolfman 3 years ago
Firewolfman
runnersva1LaL36Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forefeit, therefore obvious and easy descion.
Vote Placed by DoctorDeku 3 years ago
DoctorDeku
runnersva1LaL36Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
runnersva1LaL36Tied
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: Conduct for FF.