The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Narcotics in the U.S. should be legalized

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/14/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,022 times Debate No: 17056
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




I challenge hawktoo to a debate in which we will argue whether or not narcotics should be legalized in the U.S.

Burden of Proof
CON will argue that narcotics should not be legalized in the U.S.
PRO will argue that narcotics should be legalized in the U.S.

Debate Structure
Round 1 - Acceptance
Round 2 - Arguments
Round 3 - Rebuttals
Round 4 - Conclusions


Narcotic - any of a class of substances that blunt the senses, as opium, morphine, belladonna, and alcohol, that in large quantities produce euphoria, stupor, or coma, that when used constantly can cause habituation or addiction, and that are used in medicine to relieve pain, cause sedation, and induce sleep [1].

I look forward to a fun debate!



I accept your debate.

I am honored to be challenged by you and I wish you only the best of luck
I do believe that only certain narcotics but I shall argue in a general range for the sake of the debate.
Debate Round No. 1


I thank my opponent for his speedy acceptance and I am ready to present my arguments in this debate.

Argument 1 – Narcotics have several negative effects

Narcotics in general have very negative effects that can harm not only the narcotic user but also society as a whole. Narcotics can dull a user’s senses, making him/her less aware of their environment [1] and thus less able to avoid accidents (such as automotive crashes). Narcotics can also cause AIDS, cancer, and other diseases which lead to severe personal injury or even death [1].

Argument 2 – Narcotics are a threat to society

Narcotics are also commonly used to put the user into a very sleepy, drowsy state [1]. Taking into account that users’ sensory skills are already lessened, this could lead to a narcotics user operating machinery while under this drowsy state. This would obviously lead to the user putting not only him/herself in mortal danger, but also the general public that the user is available to.

Argument 3 – Narcotics are generally addictive

Constant or repetitive use of narcotics can lead to addiction [2], where the user has urges that can only be cured with more narcotics. This prolongs and amplifies the effects listed above, making narcotics even more dangerous. Also, in the event that addicted users do not get the narcotics they crave, they go into withdrawal, a severe physical condition [1] that can further handicap users.

I have proved that not only can narcotics be severely handicapping and dangerous to the users themselves, but narcotics can also be a threat to the general public. I eagerly await my opponent’s arguments.






First i would like to thank my opponent for his well thought out reasons.

My key statements for this round will be

A) The use of certain narcotics (pot, various types of marijuana, etc.) can be used for the medicinal treatments to help ease the effects of radiation from patients who receive such treatments.

B) SOME forms of currently illegal narcotics (if made legal) have a large chance of pumping the economy. With the ability to legally sell Pot for example many businesses that sold it would boom and that would give money to people who would then spend it and then the money would go through many cycles and eventually end up giving the economy a shove in the right direction.

C) Decrease in crime rates, and for those of you who are curious as to what i mean the amount of drug-dealers would decrease greatly due to the soul fact that many gangs dealers and independent dealers would make less money due to the plain fact that there would be such little point for them because not only are they less convenient but the gangs would find another large cash flow
Debate Round No. 2


Thank you, Pro, for your arguments. Keeping with the debate structure, I will now present my rebuttals.

Rebuttal 1 - Medical narcotics
My opponent argues that one reason for the legalization of narcotics is their potential for medical use. May I remind my opponent, however, that medical marijuana and the like are an entirely other issue. Medical cannabis, for example, has been used for thousands of years [1], and I do not doubt its medical potential. However, medical narcotics would be an entirely separate category than the legalization of narcotics in general, given that several states have fought for the right to medical marijuana [2], but not the complete legalization of the narcotic. Therefore, my opponent's argument would be an entire debate in itself.

Rebuttal 2 - Economic benefits of narcotics
My opponent goes on to argue that in the event of narcotic legalization in the U.S., there would be enough economic benefits to justify that legalization. I do not contest to the fact that the U.S. economy would benefit from narcotic legalization, but are the substantial negative effects worth it? After all, with my opponent's logic, the same economic "shove in the right direction" could be achieved from the latest electronics, video game, clothing line, etc. Those same "cycles" can be achieved with standard inventions and publications without the harsh negative effects of narcotics.

Rebuttal 3 - Narcotics can cause a decrease in crime rates
Finally, my opponent argues that with the legalization of narcotics, crime rates would drop due to drug dealers and the like losing their primary source of income. However, my opponent even goes on to point out that gangs would find another large cash flow; meaning that not only would gangs continue to thrive, but all of the previous dealers in that gang would most likely end up finding a new position in that gang. As for independent dealers, the circle of crime goes on for most of them, meaning that as with most criminals, if an obstacle comes in their way of one crime, they find another to replace it.

I excitedly await my opponent's rebuttals as we advance into the fourth and final round of this debate.



I first would like to thank my opponent for his well reasoned rebuttal's.

My first rebuttal would against the point of narcotics and there negative affects.
I do not deny that there are negative effect and I would never try to do so because everyone deserves to know that there will be consequences and they can be fatal but for those who have stable self control would most likely be able to control how often they do these thing to the point where it becomes more difficult for such occur.

My second rebuttal would be against that narcotics are a threat to society.
Indeed they are a threat to society to those who are careless or have made an over-usage. But at the same time if it does cause as my opponent says "Narcotics are also commonly used to put the user into a very sleepy, drowsy state" this could also be used to help insomniacs.

My last rebuttal would be against the statement that narcotics are addictive.
Yes narcotics are addictive but addiction has not only never stopped anyone from using it but also from the government for making it legal. (alcohol, gambling, nicotine all of which are legal) But I would like to say yes they are addictive and no I do not recommend the use of all narcotics and I warn all of you who use them to be careful in doing such.

Good luck to my opponent through the rest of this argument and I wish him only the best during the voting stage.
Debate Round No. 3


As this is the fourth round, I will now present my conclusion.

Throughout this debate, I have proved that not only does narcotic use lead to diseases that can cause personal injury or even death, but the use of narcotics can also lead to a person doing a multitude of things while under the influence of this drowsy, dulled state brought on by the narcotics. Thus, society would also be at risk if narcotics were legalized. Not only this, but addiction can come to those who constantly use narcotics, making the above dangers even worse. I would also like to note that in my opponent's rebuttals, he conceded most of my points; he accepted the fact that the negative effects of narcotics are immense, that narcotics are a threat to society, and that narcotics are addictive. He completely accepted my third argument regarding the addictive properties of narcotics, rebutting only that other addictive things in the U.S. such as gambling and alcohol are also legal. However, this does not justify the legalization of another dangerous and threatening material in the U.S. All-in-all, my opponent failed to successfully rebut my arguments while I refuted his.

I would like to again thank my opponent for his good sport, and for a fun and clean debate. I wish him the greatest amount of luck as this debate draws to a close.


hawktoo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.