The Instigator
SuperPerfundo
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
fresnoinvasion
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points

Marijuana Legalization

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  
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: 3/5/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,875 times Debate No: 7258
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (6)

 

SuperPerfundo

Pro

I think marijuana should be legalized.

1. Other substances
Alcohol impairs you more, yet is legal. Cigarettes offer all of the same health concerns, but offer no significant benefit (high) and most cigarette smokers smoke more than marijuana users on a daily basis. Also, marijuana has been medically proven to be non-habit-forming, unlike cigarettes and alcohol.

2. Tax revenue
The government could tax and regulate the marijuana industry, generating state revenue at a time when it is needed. Also, the birth of a high demand industry would foster jobs and economic growth.

3. Criminals
With the ever growing popularity of marijuana, middle-class people who are not drug or street savvy are having to deal with dangerous people and frequent the more suspect areas of town to procure their product. Legalization would stop this. Also, legalization takes away a large portion of criminal funds, without the cost of policing. By offering the legal sale of marijuana, the criminal organizations who deal it now are out that revenue.

4. Quality
The medical purposes of marijuana (while they may be suspect) would be improved with improved quality. If people are able to grow it freely, it can be privatized professionally and developed at lower cost and higher quality yield.

5. Civil Liberties
The political history of marijuana is suspect. Many believe it was outlawed under false pretenses (i'll go into detail if so requested). Also, in a free country, a citizen should be able to indulge/harm themselves in any way they see fit as long as they do not infringe upon or danger the rights of others. While other harder substances may offer this risk, the private consumption of marijuana doesn't.

I'm looking forward to hearing from someone on this topic. Thanks in advance.
fresnoinvasion

Con

1. Due to the fact that my opponent doesn't specify who it will be legalized for, it can only be assumed that it is completely legal. It is important to set a definite age limit on who can and cannot be caught in possession of/smoking/selling marijuana. Allowing children to smoke marijuana can cause permanent damage onto a child's psychological development and outweighs any revenue to the government brought on by its sale. This is the number 1 most important reason to vote con in todays round. Even if he proves that marijuana legalization is overall better for adults, he does not specify that it is only legalized for those over 18 or 21, so it is assumed that it will be legalized for all, and loses because of it.

On other substances-

1. These are strictly limited to those that are only over 18/21- only legal for them. Full out legalization of marijuana would leave it open to kids, which is horrible and hurts psychological development.

On tax revenue-

1. Impact on kids outweighs
2. This hurts the drug dealers, now every deal they make will cause them to pay taxes. Not only that the consumer will have to pay taxes. I believe that cheap, good weed is the best. With taxes applied, we will see a higher price of weed in every day life. No one wants that, and may stop smoking because of it.
3. The positive impact on the economy of more pot smokers outweighs. If you have every experienced the munchies or cottonmouth upon smoking you can testify to the fact that lots of snacks and water are purchased that would not have been purchased otherwise. These purchases contribute to a healthy economy.

On criminals-

1. It is ignorant to believe that only the lower class are the ones that sell marijuana. Middle class and even upper class people are the biggest dealers, they are completely safe and don't pose a threat to any costumers. They only have the chill dealer personality.
2. How many people went out and committed a crime when smoking marijuana? Hardly any. Drug dealers are not criminals, there is absolutely no link from turning a drug dealer into a criminal. So the impact of giving criminals money means nothing

On quality-

1. It is actually a fact that because marijuana has been grown indoors for so many years because it is illegal, the THC content has risen. Another reason the THC content has risen is because drug dealers take a lot of time and consideration when cross breading their plants to get the best results. A discovery channel documentary explains all of this, and how the THC content has risen substantially because of marijuanas illegality

On civil liberties-

1. Kids shouldnt have it
Debate Round No. 1
SuperPerfundo

Pro

It seemed reasonable and apparent to me that we would apply a legal status similar to alcohol. I apologize for not including that in my opening round. Obviously, providing children with marijuana is not a plausible or advantageous action.

1. Other substances
You provide no other opposition other than the harmful effects marijuana has on children. Since I am not advocating that kids use pot, this does not apply to my argument.

Still, this is a critical point. Much of the criticism of marijuana is rooted in its harmful effects. The fact that other, more harmful substances are fully condoned and legalized legitimizes marijuana and its legality. Extend the fact that marijuana is not addictive and has some positive health effects as well, yet more harmful and addictive substances remain allowed.

2. Tax Revenue
1) Kids dont apply.

2) Drug dealers go to extravagant lengths and costs to avoid the police now due to marijuanas illegality. Saving them this trouble and cost far outweighs the fiscal impact of sales tax. Also, the privatization and mass production of weed on the open market would drastically reduce the price. Supply and demand.

3) Agreed. But, your arg works in my favor. Legalization would lead to far more pot smokers. My resolution takes your arg a step further by not only failing to decrease current smokers, but attracting new legal users as well. (Imagine the money a gas station with a doritos-pot combo would make)

The tax revenue would be a phenomenal boost to our nations public budget. A conservative estimate starts at 40 billion dollars a year back in the nineties! Imagine the revenue now. Further, a new high growth industry would be born, creating jobs.

3 Criminals

1) I am not claiming that ONLY lower class people sell drugs. But, the majority of drug trafficking is done by dangerous people, rich or poor. Illegality makes casual pot smokers deal with dangerous dealers. Whether its a middle man or the smoker themselves, the gang related drug trafficking culture intersects with casual drug users too often.

2) You misunderstand my argument. I am not claiming people smoke, then go commit crimes. Rather, that the large portion of drugs that are smuggled into the country are done so by large criminal organizations that sell drugs in order to fund other criminal projects. While there are drug dealers that are not in gangs, granted, at some point down the distribution ladder, illegal marijuana generates revenue for people who partake in other, more serious criminal activity. Legal marijuana helps to solve this problem.

4. Quality
While marijuana horticulturists have been able to progress the potency of the drug over time, legalization would allow legitimate companies to study, confer, and produce even better quality weed, also at lower cost. The progress that has been made now has been forced into basements and internet blogs, with the opening of the marijuana industry, real strides could be made.

5. Civil Liberites
Again, I dont advocate kids using. As an American citizen, I should have the right to indulge in whatever recreation I see fit for myself, as long as I am not endangering others. Not only would marijuana make the community a safer place by limiting criminal activity and funding, legalization generates billions in tax revenue as well.

Thanks. I am looking forward to hearing your response.

http://www.druglibrary.org...
fresnoinvasion

Con

I've got a lot going on so I can't answer every argument.

Vote on the fact that he does not specify who it will be legalized to. I probably wouldnt have taken the debate otherwise, and this proves in round abuse, changing a definition after my speech.

Thanks,
Debate Round No. 2
SuperPerfundo

Pro

SuperPerfundo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by falafel 7 years ago
falafel
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by switch_blade_cf 7 years ago
switch_blade_cf
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by SuperPerfundo 7 years ago
SuperPerfundo
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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 
Vote Placed by threelittlebirds 7 years ago
threelittlebirds
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by fresnoinvasion 7 years ago
fresnoinvasion
SuperPerfundofresnoinvasionTied
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