The Instigator
NonZeroBubble
Pro (for)
Losing
22 Points
The Contender
Koopin
Con (against)
Winning
26 Points

Marijuana legalization

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: 12/27/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,180 times Debate No: 10581
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (23)
Votes (9)

 

NonZeroBubble

Pro

Marijuana is fun to use, no doubt about it, there should be no reason why it's illegal. Moderate use poses lung damage of little to none. It is not physically addicting, it has no permanent mental effects. It is no more immoral than alcohol. The smoke is much much cleaner than cigarette smokes and people who smoke cigarettes smoke all the time whereas weed you don't usually smoke all the time. Basically marijuana is harmless besides the carcinogenic smoke that can be avoided by using a vaporizer. Have you ever heard of a car accident involving marijuana? Have you ever heard of crimes, accidents, or violence involving marijuana? Does anyone have any real evidence that marijuana should have ever been illegal?
Koopin

Con

Thank you for starting this interesting debate.

My opponent is arguing that there is no reason why marijuana should be legal.

Marijuana is the most popular drug in America. Many people, especially the younger generation, believe the lie that marijuana has very little health problems. This is not true.

Some of the short term effects are:

1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch).
2. Problems with memory and learning.
3. Loss of coordination.
4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving.
5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure.

This list alone is enough to show why marijuana was made illegal, though I will say something more.

My opponent says "Have you ever heard of crimes, accidents, or violence involving marijuana"
Yes, I have indeed.
Taking marijuana is illegal, so therefore it is a crime in itself.
There have been accidents from people drinking and smoking marijuana, and there has been violence when police try to arrest people with marijuana in their possession.

I will continue my argument in round two.

Thank you.

Sources:
(1). http://faculty.washington.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
NonZeroBubble

Pro

I haven't gotten the formalities of debating down just yet so excuse my presentation.

Well to start off, something that is illegal is only wrong within the context of a system that is setup. This does not make it globally and indefinitely wrong. Yes, an action that is illegal is a crime in this particular set of laws. Your statement included no fallacies but a crime is a harsh word that tends to give the impression of wrong-doing, when the truth is, there is nothing wrong about taking marijuana. It is illegal, it is a crime only because this government does not accept it. Before i go around in circles too much, i'll address the symptoms you've listed above.

Distorted perception- i would say, sensually, marijuana is less debilitating than alcohol. While you are under a certain level of influence in these areas, i have to say you are far from dysfunctional. The summation of the effects being nothing more than moderately uncoordinated.

Problems with memory- yes, while not completely impairing, there are times when your memory is a bit fuzzy. This wouldn't put you or anyone else in any immediate danger. Problems with learning- I am confident in saying that marijuana makes you think much more than usual. While i cannot vouch for any argument directly against this i cannot say that this is true either.

As i said above lack of coordination is a moderate effect.

Trouble with think problem solving- I don't believe there is any evidence to support this, in fact i can personally say this is the opposite of what really happens. In some situations you may become unfocused bu in others you may be hyper focused and able to think deeply about certain things. Definitely not conventional problem solving but i have to say thought seems to be increased while under the influence.

Increased heart rate reduced blood pressure, while this is a symptom, this doesn't pose any threat to your life. I doubt there has been any marijuana related deaths or illnesses outside of lung cancer (which i don't believe marijuana smoke can cause by itself). Increased heart rate is a bit scary but nothing happens to you and your heart actually can be strengthened by this just as any other heart exercise would do.

While these effects are mostly true, it gives the government no right to outlaw the use of marijuana. If it's a morality issue, ban alcohol too, if it's not, then accept the fact the the money put towards catching, jailing, and dealing with weed-related crimes is a larger debt than that of what you'd be losing because of the poor ability the regulate the taxes of weed.

The temporary effects are minimally dangerous and the positive effects such as euphoria outweighs any short term negative. There aren't any longterm effects. All i have to say is don't operate heavy machinery under the influence, besides that, have fun! :)

Thanks, and looking forward to a response.
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.
A reason: A basis or cause, as for some belief.
You specifically said there's no reason why marijuana should be illegal. I believe that I have already shown you at least one reason why it is illegal. I will state yet another reason, children.
Smoking is already the cool thing to do for kids. But the moment some dealers find out that marijuana is legal and they can get as much as they want, they will be selling to kids. Since marijuana is so "harmless" Then it should be okay for kids to take it, right?
Also, you keep talking about using marijuana in moderate amounts. Just because you would take it in small amounts does not mean everyone else will. The longer you hold marijuana in, the more high you get. You experience what marijuana users call burnout. Read this clip from articlesbase.com
"Burnout is a term basically acclimated by marijuana smokers themselves to call the outcomes of enduring use. Adolescent peoples who smoke marijuana greatly over sustained periods of time can become dull, lazy moving, and negligent. These "burned-out" users are sometimes so blind of their ambience that they do not acknowledge if accompany assert to them, and they do not catch they accept a problem."
You said,
"Increased heart rate reduced blood pressure, while this is a symptom, this doesn't pose any threat to your life."
This statement is very wrong indeed. Increased heart rate makes the risk of a heart attack very high. here are some of the dangers of increased heart rate.
1. hypertension
2. weakening of epithelial tissue that makes up blood cells (this makes an individual more susceptible to aneurysms which is the bursting of blood vessels)
3. increased susceptibility to heart attacks
You, for some reason, think that I said marijuana is morally wrong, in no way did I say that. What I am trying to show the reason marijuana is illegal.

I would like to state a quote from Winston Churchill,

"'A nation trying to tax itself to prosperity, is like a man standing in a bucket, trying to lift himself up by the handles."
Concerning your argument on taxes, meth could also boost our economy. So could cocaine. Just because something would help our economy does not mean that it would help us.
I look forward to your reply.

Sources:
(1). http://www.articlesbase.com...
(2). http://dictionary.reference.com...
(3). http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca...
Debate Round No. 2
NonZeroBubble

Pro

"Also, you keep talking about using marijuana in moderate amounts. Just because you would take it in small amounts does not mean everyone else will. The longer you hold marijuana in, the more high you get. You experience what marijuana users call burnout."

It is impossible to overdose on THC, to achieve that you would need to smoke a couple hundred pounds of weed in around 15 minutes. When you smoke enough you reach your limit. This is when you get as high as your going to get. Most people smoke enough to reach this max and what you smoke after that won't do much. Since marijuana is only physiologically addicting, it's a want not a need. The only result that comes out of taking large amount of marijuana is the harmful effect smoke has on the lungs. If everyone else doesn't take it is moderate amounts the damage will be towards their lungs and that is all. To avoid this, use a vaporizer, if you can control your usage just smoke it. In the movie "super high me" a guy smoked weed everyday all the time for a month and only lost 3% lung capacity which wasn't even proven to be permanent. Besides have a great time for that month, no damage or harmful effects were produced whatsoever.

Burnout is a temporary effect that you will feels after your high wears off. Just as a hangover, burnout will last for a little while and then eventually dissipate.

----------

Myth: Marijuana Causes an Amotivational Syndrome. Marijuana makes users passive, apathetic, and uninterested in the future. Students who use marijuana become underachievers and workers who use marijuana become unproductive.

Fact: For twenty-five years, researchers have searched for a marijuana-induced amotivational syndrome and have failed to find it. People who are intoxicated constantly, regardless of the drug, are unlikely to be productive members of society. There is nothing about marijuana specifically that causes people to lose their drive and ambition. In laboratory studies, subjects given high doses of marijuana for several days or even several weeks exhibit no decrease in work motivation or productivity. Among working adults, marijuana users tend to earn higher wages than non-users. College students who use marijuana have the same grades as nonusers. Among high school students, heavy use is associated with school failure, but school failure usually comes first.

Sources:
Himmelstein, J.L. The Strange Career of Marihuana: Politics and Ideology of Drug Control in America. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1983.
Mellinger, G.D. et al. "Drug Use, Academic Performance, and Career Indecision: Longitudinal Data in Search of a Model." Longitudinal Research on Drug Use: Empirical Findings and Methodological Issues. Ed. D.B. Kandel. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1978. 157-177.
Pope, H.G. et al., "Drug Use and Life Style Among College Undergraduates in 1989: A Comparison With 1969 and 1978," American Journal of Psychiatry 147 (1990): 998-1001.

----------

Myth: Marijuana Causes Crime. Marijuana users commit more property offenses than nonusers. Under the influence of marijuana, people become irrational, aggressive, and violent.

Fact: Every serious scholar and government commission examining the relationship between marijuana use and crime has reached the same conclusion: marijuana does not cause crime. The vast majority of marijuana users do not commit crimes other than the crime of possessing marijuana. Among marijuana users who do commit crimes, marijuana plays no causal role. Almost all human and animal studies show that marijuana decreases rather than increases aggression.

Sources:
Fagan, J., et al. "Delinquency and Substance Use Among Inner-City Students." Journal of Drug Issues 20 (1990): 351-402.
Johnson, L.D., et al. "Drugs and Delinquency: A Search for Causal Connections." Ed. D.B. Kandel. Longitudinal Research on Drug Use: Empirical Findings and Methodological Issues. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978. 137-156.
Goode, E. "Marijuana and Crime." Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Appendix I. National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. 447-453.
Abram, K.M. and L.A. Teplin. "Drug Disorder, Mental Illness, and Violence." Drugs and Violence: Causes, Correlates, and Consequences. Rockville: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1990. 222-238.
Cherek, D.R., et al. "Acute Effects of Marijuana Smoking on Aggressive, Escape and Point-Maintained Responding of Male Drug Users." Psychopharmacology 111 (1993): 163-168.
Tinklenberg, J.R., et al. "Drugs and criminal assaults by adolescents: A Replication Study." Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 13 (1981): 277-287.

---------

Myth: Marijuana Impairs Memory and Cognition. Under the influence of marijuana, people are unable to think rationally and intelligently. Chronic marijuana use causes permanent mental impairment.

Fact: Marijuana produces immediate, temporary changes in thoughts, perceptions, and information processing. The cognitive process most clearly affected by marijuana is short-term memory. In laboratory studies, subjects under the influence of marijuana have no trouble remembering things they learned previously. However, they display diminished capacity to learn and recall new information. This diminishment only lasts for the duration of the intoxication. There is no convincing evidence that heavy long-term marijuana use permanently impairs memory or other cognitive functions.

Sources:
Wetzel, C.D. et al., "Remote Memory During Marijuana Intoxication," Psychopharmacology 76 (1982): 278-81.
Deadwyler, S.A. et al., "The Effects of Delta-9-THC on Mechanisms of Learning and Memory." Neurobiology of Drug Abuse: Learning and Memory. Ed. L. Erinoff. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse 1990. 79-83.
Block, R.I. et al., "Acute Effects of Marijuana on Cognition: Relationships to Chronic Effects and Smoking Techniques." Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 43 (1992): 907-917.

After showing you these common misconceptions disproved, it is clear that marijuana doesn't cause crime, doesn't impair memory or cognition, and most importantly doesn't promote a lazy attitude. These claims are backed up with legitimate sources too.

The largest study of the health effects of marijuana to date was done by Kaiser Permanente. They studied the health records of 65,000 patients over a number of years. They found no significant differences between the health histories of those who smoked pot versus those who did not smoke marijuana.
Marijuana and Mortality
http://www.druglibrary.org...

Every major government commission report on marijuana from around the world over the last 100 years has concluded that marijuana prohibition was based on racism, ignorance, and nonsense. They all said the marijuana laws should have been repealed long ago because they do more harm than good. They all said that marijuana is not a significant threat to health, even when used regularly for decades.
Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy - http://druglibrary.org...

Heart attack risk??? "Despite the high percentage of people younger than 50 years old who report they use the drug – 12.5 percent – Mittleman doesn't foresee an epidemic of pot-triggered heart attacks. For a 50-year-old baby boomer without other risk factors, like high blood pressure or high cholesterol, the absolute risk of having a heart attack in the crucial first hour after smoking marijuana is one in 100,000, he says.
These findings come from a study of 3,882 people who survived heart attacks. It was conducted at a number of centers around the country, including Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, where Mittleman works. In the study, 124 people reported using marijuana regularly. Of these, 37 people said they used it within 24 hours of their heart attacks. Nine said they smoked it within an hour of their attacks."
Koopin

Con

My opponent says that all people have to do is use a vaporizer to be okay. Again, just becuase my opponent does something does not mean that everyone will.

I keep reasons why Marijuana is illegal and all my opponent does is try to make the after math seem a bit better.

All my opponent has done is wrote a few words, then copied and pasted the rest.

I have already listed the reason why Marijuana is illegal, therefore winning this debate.

Sadly my opponent can not use his own words in order to win a debate.

My opponent also failed to say anything about what I said about the children.

All I had to do is show the reason, it has been shown.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
NonZeroBubble

Pro

I asked "Does anyone have any real evidence that marijuana should have ever been illegal?" I could give reasons why, in my opinion, why planting more than two trees on your property is illegal, this does not mean the reasons are legitimate and this does not mean the reasons support the issues of legality. The after math is actually almost non-exist. The temporary effects are what we argue and i have explained that they pose no danger to you or others. You can listed the reasons given by the government on why marijuana is illegal but i asked for proof for marijuana rightfully being illegal, not the other. You don't win a debate by stating the reasons that marijuana is illegal you win a debate by stating and proving the marijuana should be illegal. There's a difference. If i wanted the government's opinion on pot i could look it up. I want to be convinced that marijuana should be illegal and i haven't been obliged yet.

You may be good at debating but the truth is it's hard to debate against such a lost cause. There's is nothing wrong with weed. The substance itself isn't as much illegal as is the indirect effects such as economical effects, political effects, ect.

Thanks and good luck
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.
My opponent says that the point of this debate is not to see the reason why its illegal, but instead to see why it should be legal.
If he wanted that kind of debate he should have started a debate with the resolution "Marijuana should be legalized"
My opponent did not say that, he said that there is no REASON why marijuana is illegal.
I have already said what a reason is, a basis or cause, as for some BELIEF.
The people who legalized marijuana believed that there were some hazards.

My opponent also just picks certain things that he can argue and does not argue my against everything I say.

Even though my opponent has one more round left, I heavily urge a con vote.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
NonZeroBubble

Pro

With all due respect, why would i want you to tell me why the government thinks marijuana should be illegal? I know that, i could easily have found that out. I'm here to debate and discuss whether these reasons are legitimate and whether the reasons are enough to make marijuana illegal. I'm here to debate whether or not marijuana should be illegal, i thought that was clear.

This is not a war on technicalities. I said there is no reason marijuana should be illegal. Anyone can comes up with reasons why they think the opposite. I'm here to determine whether these reasons hold true and constitutue a law.

I know the so called "adequate" reasons that marijuana use is banned. I want to debate those reasons not have you name them for me and say i'm done i win. You simply stated some of the side effects, not why those effects should make the use of weed illegal.

I'm not avoiding anything here, i'm sure of my claim and will debate whatever issue you'd like. I'm not picking and choosing. Please, i challenge you to put up whatever you'd like to for me to argue against.

My original arguement --- "Marijuana is fun to use, no doubt about it, there should be no reason why it's illegal. Moderate use poses lung damage of little to none. It is not physically addicting, it has no permanent mental effects. It is no more immoral than alcohol. The smoke is much much cleaner than cigarette smokes and people who smoke cigarettes smoke all the time whereas weed you don't usually smoke all the time. Basically marijuana is harmless besides the carcinogenic smoke that can be avoided by using a vaporizer. Have you ever heard of a car accident involving marijuana? Have you ever heard of crimes, accidents, or violence involving marijuana? Does anyone have any real evidence that marijuana should have ever been illegal?"

I said there should be no reason why it's illegal. I didn't asked for an opinion generated by the government. I'm looking for evidence why marijuana should be illegal as i stated in my last sentence. I still stand my by statement that there should be no reason why it's illegal. I want reasons that support the opposing position.
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your last argument.

In no where in your posts did you say that you wanted to debate legitimate reasons, just reasons.

You admitted that I have given you reasons, you said

"Anyone can come up with REASONS why they think the opposite."

You failed to make your argument clear, therefore I debated on what you wrote, not what you wanted.

Yes, you have avoided things that I have said. The whole thing about selling to children, you did not even comment on that matter. There is a reason right there.

You want to keep the government out of this, yet you still want to debate legal things?
I am sorry but that is impossible, the government makes the laws.

Audience, I have clearly shown the reason why the Marijuana is illegal. It is up to you to believe it or not yet it is still a reason.

I have clearly won spelling, conduct, and sources. Who had more of a convincing argument is up to you.

Thank you.

Sources:
(1). http://dictionary.reference.com...
(2). http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 5
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 6 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Conduct: Tied

S/G: Con

Arguments: Con - I really wanted to vote Pro on this one. Pro clearly pointed out that the debate was not about technicalities, but about whether or not marijuana should be legalized, which I completely agree with; however, Pro also admitted early on that most of the harmful effects that Con had listed were legitimate risks. Although Con's arguments become far weaker and very dismissive around the middle of the debate, but Pro copied and pasted many of his arguments, also, even if he did source them. Ultimately, what decided this for me were the dropped arguments. Though I agree with Pro that the debate doesn't center on whether reasons exist, but whether or not those reasons are legitimate, this doesn't justify Pro dropping several of Con's arguments, such as the "selling to children" example that Con provides us with. Con's arguments, while bordering a bit abusive at times ("I only have to show that reasons exist..."), went untouched by Pro when it counted.

Sources: Con - I give this to Con for one main reason: though I'm almost certain that Pro had MORE sources, he abused tended to abuse them to the point of copying and pasting entire paragraphs for his own use; Con, however, not only pointed this out, but used his own evidence to get a concession from Pro concerning the harmful effects of marijuana use.
Posted by daniel_t 6 years ago
daniel_t
@Koopin: Those may be reasons why *you* would make marijuana illegal, but they are not the reasons that marijuana was *actually* made illegal. Do some research...

"...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
--Harry J. Anslinger, the Gore Files.
Posted by yeahyeah21 6 years ago
yeahyeah21
I don't care if marijuana smokers "typically" don't smoke as much...but that smoke builds up. It's not just one marijuana smoker that doesn't smoke alot...it's all marijuana smokers who may or may not smoke alot, including laced marijuana. If its legal, we're basically giving out the message that we don't care about people's decisions to be smoke-free. It may be your body but it's everyone's body too.
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch).
2. Problems with memory and learning.
3. Loss of coordination.
4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving.
5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure.
Posted by daniel_t 6 years ago
daniel_t
@Koopin: I understand that. There was a reason but the reason you presented wasn't the reason marijuana was made illegal. That's why I didn't vote for you.
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
daniel_T, what I was trying to show was that there was a reason. It does not matter if the reason was right or wrong, it was still a reason. Thats why I said the voters probably did not read this debate.
Posted by daniel_t 6 years ago
daniel_t
You are all off base. Marijuana was not made illegal because of any assumed harmful affects to the consumer, a marijuana debate about said affects is pointless.
Posted by CupcakeAlmighty 6 years ago
CupcakeAlmighty
First off, if there is any harm to the lungs, it is not "minimal", unless you use a comparison. Such as to cigarettes or whatever.

I agree with my rival, Koopin, because he presented the most facts in his arguements and sources. Though, I cannot vote, because I don't have a cell phone. I find that being required for one is stupid = /
Posted by NonZeroBubble 6 years ago
NonZeroBubble
Moderate smoking of marijuana appears to pose minimal danger to the lungs. Like tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains a number of irritants and carcinogens. But marijuana users typically smoke much less often than tobacco smokers, and over time, inhale much less smoke. As a result, the risk of serious lung damage should be lower in marijuana smokers. There have been no reports of lung cancer related solely to marijuana, and in a large study presented to the American Thoracic Society in 2006, even heavy users of smoked marijuana were found not to have any increased risk of lung cancer. Unlike heavy tobacco smokers, heavy marijuana smokers exhibit no obstruction of the lung's small airway. That indicates that people will not develop emphysema from smoking marijuana.

-Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. "Legalization: Panacea or Pandora's Box." New York. (1995): 36.
-Turner, Carlton E. The Marijuana Controversy. Rockville: American Council for Drug Education, 1981.
-Nahas, Gabriel G. and Nicholas A. Pace. Letter. "Marijuana as Chemotherapy Aid Poses Hazards." New York Times 4 December 1993: A20.
-Inaba, Darryl S. and William E. Cohen. Uppers, Downers, All-Arounders: Physical and Mental Effects of Psychoactive Drugs. 2nd ed. Ashland: CNS Productions, 1995. 174.
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
If you agree with me, maybe you could vote for me.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by ansonmypants 6 years ago
ansonmypants
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 NonZeroBubble 6 years ago
NonZeroBubble
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 Cody_Franklin 6 years ago
Cody_Franklin
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by atheistman 6 years ago
atheistman
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 ricky78 6 years ago
ricky78
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 omelet 6 years ago
omelet
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by oceanix 6 years ago
oceanix
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 
Vote Placed by daniel_t 6 years ago
daniel_t
NonZeroBubbleKoopinTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00