The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

(PRO)Shooting Up (Intravenous) Vs. (CON)Snorting (Intranasal) Drugs.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/3/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 11,916 times Debate No: 20188
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




As my first debate, I have decided to pick a very controversial topic. What is better? shooting or sniffing a drug? I am pro IV and con IN. first round acceptance only.


I accept the challenge and will prove that the Daryl Strawberry method is superior and less dangerous then the Jason Mewes method. I await your opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1


Have you ever shot up? I mean there aint nothing better then getting a fat sack of heroin, throwing it in a spoon and cooking it, then getting your rig ready and slamming it in your vein and plunging to the depths of euphoria!

Point 1 - there is no other feeling that comes close to IVing a fat load, and no other route of administration hits you faster and harder. you cannot sniff anywhere near the amount of stuff you could stick in a syringe, therefore you can't get as high in one sniff as you can with one shot.

point1a - time between administration and euphoric feelings is reduced drastically when IVing. typically ingesting a drug takes 30 - 60 minutes to have an effect, IN takes 5 - 10 minutes, Smoking a drug usually takes 2-5 minutes but IVing, however, hits you in about 15 - 45 seconds.

point1b - initial mg consumption is way higher when you IV, giving you a way stronger feeling. egg: if you sniff 20mg of a drug all 20 mg go up your nose but not your bloodstream, when you IV 20mg of a drug all 20mg go straight into your bloodstream therefore giving you much more pronounced effects.

point 2 - you only have 2 (two) nostrils, but you have HUNDREDS OF VEINS, so for a hardcore everyday user, your nose will end up becoming permanently damaged way before an injector's veins will become un-usable simply because we have so many available options and sites that when properly rotated and taken care of never go bad.


That is a good point of view, but let me explain my main arguments.

C1) Snorting is more convienent.

When at work, on the road, or in the company of other people it is extremely hard or sometimes not even possible to find a bathroom or safe haven to prepare the needle and shoot up. Snorting is a quick, efficient way to handle your business in the matter of seconds. All you have to do is crush the contents of the bag, open it up and sniff. The process for intravenous methods are too time consuming to be an optimal way to get high when you're not in the comfort of your own home or other drug users.

C2) Shooting up is more addictive because of the fact you already stated which is more of the drug is absorbed directly through your bloodstream. The increased potency of the intravenous method leads to harsher cravings and subsequent withdrawl.

C3) Shooting up leaves track marks, making you look dirty and also making it harder to conceal your drug addiction while snorting drugs leaves the public unable to tell if you have an addiction lest you actually be high in their prescence. There is also a social stigma with intravenous users that results in bad public attitude towards people who use said method.

C4) Snorting works well and is still better then popping drugs in your mouth, and without all the nasty side affects and already stated issues associated with IV users. You are more likely to overdose with IV use, and the inexperienced user may inject themselves wrong and cause damage to themselves. You can hit a nerve or an arterry.

C5) Intravenous drug use may lead to HIV transmision or other diseases such as hepititis or skin abcesses. One third of HIV cases in the U.S. stem from IV drug use, and although many pharmacies sell needles and many counties have needle exhange programs..some don't.
Debate Round No. 2


Ok for round 3, we shall attack each others points from round 2.

c1 - snorting is more convenient.

while in certain situations this is true, such as - you just copped a bag and the cops were watching you, and now your on the run cause they are chasing you, so to get rid of evidence you sniff it all away. I agree this is way more convenient then trying to cook and then shoot a bag while one the run.

But other then that anybody could just set up their rigs in the beginning of the day so that they are already available. Any seasoned user should be able to hit a vein within seconds and be on their merry way if everything is already set up.

Plus you said that all you have to do is crush the contents and sniff, and this is not necessarily true, if it is windy out then this would not work nearly as well as you think, also if your in the middle of a crowded area you cant just pull out a sack and start sniffing, so both shooters and sniffers normally have to find some sort of shelter to do their thing.

C2 - Shooting is more addictive.

While you may think this is true, it actually is not. Both ways are equally addictive, because you are addicted first and foremost to the amount of drug you are doing, not the route of administration, (although the ROA can become a addiction in itself) someone who shoots 2 bags a day and someone who sniffs 2 bags a day are equally addicted.

C3 - Shooting leaves track marks - I will not deny that shooting up leaves track marks, but this is usually due to a lack of knowledge of how to properly shoot up and tend to the wound that's left after shooting up. If you use proper injection site rotation and you use sterile brand new needles every time, you will not have track marks. A large reason for track marks is A. people find one easy vein to hit and stick with it as opposed to changing sites, and people re use needles that become dull and thus leave bigger scars in their wake. However with proper administration techniques and a constant supply of fresh needles, it is very possible to never have a track mark, even after years of usage.

C4 - I cannot argue this point. You are right that it is easier to OD or make a deadly rookie mistake when IVing. However you can reduce your chances of these happening by informing yourself about proper techniques and proper injection sites, as well as knowing your limit. Also having a shooting partner is always a good idea, as they can get you help in the event something does happen.

C5 - Again I cannot argue this point. Again you are right that IV ROA carries with it risks of getting diseases and skin abscesses. But once again - With proper care, administration and knowledge you can reduce your chances of getting these to the point where they don't exist.

for all my points you can refer to this website


Point 1) I cannot deny that it is stronger then snorting, but my question to voters is does the strength of it outweigh the risks of damage to yourself? Once again, I cannot deny that it hits you faster, and that you ingest more of the drug but as I just it worth the potential risks?

Point 2) If you alternate nostrils, and break it up fine you will be good especially if we are talking about heroin or pills. Although with cocaine there is more of a problem since you are sniffing more. With veins although they are so numerous, there simply isnt the same health and injury risks with snorting as there is with sticking a needle in your arm. Besides the fact that overdose with IV'ing is easier because its harder to judge how much you are doing. When you are sniffing you can do a little at a time, with IV'ing it would be ridiculous to just shoot small amounts at a time. Youre most likely shooting the whole bag or at least half in terms of heroin. Newbie mistakes are more likely with IV'ing. Also, when you are using needles for a very long time, some of your veins will be messed up whether you alternate or not. Just because someone takes good care and many precautions doesn't mean that everyone does. There are a lot of people out there with messed up veins, forced to inject in their buttocks even. Therefore once again I don't think this outweighs the risks.

I await your rebuttal on this, and look forward to my rebuttal on your last post.
Debate Round No. 3


I would like to thank Con for taking this debate and offering solid points of views. For the last round rebuttals and closing arguments.

Point 1 - Is it worth the risks? YES! why? because you can do things to reduce your risks to the point where the don't exist. Always rotate sites, Know the difference between arteries and veins, always use brand new needles, never do more then your used to, and always have a buddy with you. If you do all this then the only thing that you have to worry about is getting a bad bag, however you could die from sniffing a bad bag as well but the chances are not as great.

Point 2 - It takes decades of everyday use for veins to go bad if you use proper site rotation and new needles every time. Again you only have two nostrils, which are connected to your sense of smell and your sinus glands, as well as your eyes and throat. Sniffing for long periods of time as a everyday user will greatly screw up these important features, as well as create deviations in your septum and other nasal passage ways.

The only point I refuse to argue is stigma. Both ROA's carry one and its severity depends from person to person. also the topic is which is better, not which is better for your image.

So in my closing arguments - I believe with proper care and everything I have mentioned before, that the IV ROA is the best as it delivers the best high the fastest possible way in a very safe way that doesn't tear apart your nose or your sinus glands etc.

Once again I would like to thank my opponent for taking this debate and look forward to seeing who the winner is.



1) Setting up a rig before hand is not more convienenr then snorting. It's harder to stash, and still takes longer then snorting. When you're in public restrooms or anywhere out of your "comfort zone", it is a much bigger problem then snorting. Even if I was outside in the wind, I can just roll up a dollar bill and put it inside the bag and snort away.

2) You may be right about it not being any more physically addicting, but my point that you also happened to state before was that IV'ing is the strongest method and the rush is unlike any other method. So, because of that it is more psychologically addictive. Once you use a needle, you will probably never do the drug any other way because you will feel like it is not worth it. Therefore as you stated before, the needle itself is also addictive. Some people even shoot up water when they dont have dope. Therefore it is my opinion that the IV'ing method is more addictive which is bad because of the dangers, health risks and increased risk of overdose. Plus, the fact that IV'ing is a stronger and more direct method in terms of the onset of the drug, it can't be denied that it is more addictive in terms of administration and not to the drug itself. The withdrawals are alot worse for heroin and feigning is a lot worse for cocaine since it is a stronger method.

3) I understand what youre saying but not everyone is like that. Also, after a certain amount of years it is inevitable that you will have at least a few marks. I am not trying to add new points, but what has to be noticed is that IV'ing makes it much more noticable to the public that you are high since it is a stronger, quicker method. Plus when you are a heavy addict and shooting up over five times a day, you cannot deny that you won't have at LEAST temporary marks on your arms.

4) As I said before, you are more likely to O.D. and having a shooting partner is not always possible. Also, it's not like there are classes on how to shoot up correctly. Unless you have someone do it for you or you have internet access, it's not that easy. A newbie can miss so many times before he hits the vein.

5) It is still a heavy risk that musn't be ignored. Not everyone does it safely and not everyone has good access to clean needles. Saying that if you do it right and safely, that you'll be good is true for some of the diseases (not skin diseases), but it doesn't matter when the rates of infected IV users are so high. If the rates were low I would agree with you, but the problem persists therefore diseases and skin problems are another problem with IV use.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 6 years ago
"C1) Snorting is more convienent.

When at work, on the road, or in the company of other people it is extremely hard or sometimes not even possible to find a bathroom or safe haven to prepare the needle and shoot up. Snorting is a quick, efficient way to handle your business in the matter of seconds."

I just died xD
Posted by esisCOA 6 years ago
can you explain why you think that?
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 6 years ago
If this were a written debate at Eton College, it would be "put up for good." That is to say, framed and remembered by all (the most prestigious honor at Eton).
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 6 years ago
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: although I think ALL drugs or drug like things are had pro had better arguments. Although con had more sources they weren't exactly better. so tie. pro wins.
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 6 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was very entertaining. Pro conceded several of Con's arguments which were very strong. Con conceded several arguments of Pro's which weren't very strong. Con won on relative safety, conveniency, and social perspective arguments. Pro won on the feeling and efficiency arguments. Con elaborated more comprehensively on his position, leading me to vote Con.