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

No cigarettes should not be banned.

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: 7/8/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 440 times Debate No: 77402
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




I don't think cigarettes should be banned. First of all banning cigarettes will cause withdraws to people who are constant users. Second it would put lots of people out of work. I thought we were trying to decrease the unemployment rates within America.


I believe cigarettes should be banned because they are an everyday cause to cancer. It is also one of the main reasons people die. I from personal experience think it is a good thing for them to be banned because many people die each day from it. I also think they should be banned because some people can be pressured into taking a cigarette when they are young.
Debate Round No. 1
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
>Reported vote: bballcrook21// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Both arguments were bad. I just picked the one that was not as bad as the other.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) No explanation for the arguments point. While the debate was short, RFDs need to provide meaningful feedback to the debates and in this case, a sentence or two explaining why one argument was better would have sufficed. The voter ignores the arguments entirely and merely passes a judgment stating that one was "better" than the other.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
Well, due to some of Con's grammar errors, I guess this poses a slight win for Pro.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
*Feels LIKE
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
I honestly think this debate is a tie. Neither side showed strong support for their arguments, nor did they cite their sources. Both sides just made claims about whether or not cigarettes should be legal. Each side made a case, but the main problem at hand is that Pro did not refute Con's argument in any way to make this a clear cut win for him. Both provided two reasons supporting their claim, and that's about it. I would've used some rebuttals and some sources in order to counter Con's argument, but since I'm not debating Pro, this has got to be a tie. It honestly feels Pro and Con are the same debater. Also, why is the debate only one round? Multiple rounds give you more time to present arguments and rebuttals.
Posted by cathaystewie 1 year ago
Hey tht1girl13,

Do you mean "No, cigarettes should not be banned"? or "No cigarettes should not be banned" as in "All cigarettes should be banned?
No votes have been placed for this debate.