The Instigator
Lee001
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
kasmic
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Persuasive Debate! (Video Format)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 4 votes the winner is...
Lee001
Voting Style: Judge Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/23/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,469 times Debate No: 79643
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (34)
Votes (4)

 

Lee001

Pro

Okay its' about time I started this!This is a persuasive video debate I had made a forum back like 4 months ago trying to find an opponent.
http://www.debate.org...)

So here is the introduction video..pretty simple.Sources (if used) shall be posted in the debate round.

Resolution "Recreational Marijuana Should be Legalized in the U.S"

By the way, I meant to say "Should be legalized" Not "It shall be legalized"
kasmic

Con

I accept! Thanks Lee for this challenge.
Debate Round No. 1
Lee001

Pro

No cases of Overdosing on Marijuana:

"While prescription painkillers cause thousands of overdose deaths each year, no one has ever died from a marijuana overdose. But is it even possible to overdose on weed? The answer is no, according to the National Cancer Institute. And here's why:
"Because cannabinoid receptors, unlike opioid receptors, are not located in the brainstem areas controlling respiration, lethal overdoses from Cannabis and cannabinoids do not occur."" (http://www.leafscience.com...)

Benefits of Marijuana:

Helps Veterans Afflicted with PTSD
Calms Tremors in Parkinson"s Patients
Relieves Arthritis Pain
Pain Reliever
And much more! (http://ieet.org...)http://youtu.be...
kasmic

Con

https://www.youtube.com...

Here is the government website that lists harms of weed.

http://www.drugabuse.gov...

Here is the story in the New York Times that I cite as an example.

http://www.nytimes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mikal 1 year ago
Mikal
I spent a day trying to figure out how to vote on this. Just out the nature of debate, and the preponderance of evidence that was presented, I had to vote pro. Strictly because almost all her points preemptively countered any point con brought up. Kasmic accidentally set himself up for a loss by accepting this as he would need rebuttals to win, due to how much is in favor of pro.

Due to all of pros points, and them already addressing the points con brought up she wins arguments as much as it pains me.

With that being said, I'm giving 2 points to kasmic just because if this was a PF debate, to me he would have won almost every type of speaker point possible.I had to force myself to listen to pros round, and cons was much more fluent, tied together, and he had a non debatable much better presentation.

I literally almost gave points to kasmic just because out of the first initial listen, I almost forgot pros round. It was lost in comparison to con. After giving it a second listen and actually taking notes and comparing the amount of evidence and points, as I said I'm reluctantly forced to give pro the win. All of her harm reduction points countered the one example kasmic gave as a harm, and she also had drug market points, and health issues on top of it. Due to preponderance , I vote pro

I wish this would have been done in a three or four round structure, as it would have gave con a fair shot and I'm almost certain he would have won
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Just as an addendum onto my vote:

I do feel that kasmic set himself up best for a longer debate. He really explained the basis by which an argument should matter here, giving me a big "why should we care?" view that resonates very well with me. I think that would have served him very well in later rounds, but what it comes to in a 1 round debate is a set up for no pay off. It matters, and if this was solely about who was more persuasive in their arguments (i.e. if this was a speech competition), he would have gotten my vote. But this is a debate, one where the weight of various arguments matter a great deal, and while I can outweigh some of Pro's arguments with Con's, she's just giving me too much in the way of impactful points for me to ignore.
Posted by kasmic 1 year ago
kasmic
Looks better than anticipated?
Posted by BLAHthedebator 1 year ago
BLAHthedebator
When first watching vids:

Hannah has a much lighter voice than I anticipated. <3

Kasmic looks much better than I anticipated.

Is that weird?????
Posted by Mikal 1 year ago
Mikal
Voting for kasmic , due to the nature of persuasive debate

Ill post my vote and rfd tom
Posted by Mikal 1 year ago
Mikal
Im not sure how to judge this without rebuttals. Debate needs to be redone. From a persuasive perspective i give it to kasmic hands down. Better spoken, more fluent, and all his points were tied. Source and point soam to lee just due to more points being made. Ill have my rfd up soon
Posted by Blazzered 1 year ago
Blazzered
Who are the judges?
Posted by Kozu 1 year ago
Kozu
I agree with mittens.
Kasmic's flow> Lee's flow

If there were presentation points, I'd give them to you.
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
Do I stutter that bad?
Posted by MisterMittens 1 year ago
MisterMittens
I.
Can't.
Vote.
What.
Quack.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Mikal 1 year ago
Mikal
Lee001kasmicTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: comments
Vote Placed by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Lee001kasmicTied
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: What ends up happening in this debate (and it's the nature of a 1 round debate) is that the two debaters present arguments without any real clash. At that point, what this actually becomes is not a debate, but a persuasive speech competition. Pro's argument focuses more on individual net impacts, elucidating what happens to a society that legalizes marijuana, and Con's argument focuses on one issue and just provides extensive reasoning as to why it matters. I'm forced to accept both sides' arguments almost completely, and what I can do from there is just compare. Con's case explains harms to individuals and others, and I'm sure that if this debate had extended into a second round, he could have weighed this within the context of Pro's argument and the debate as a whole. Without that, however, the major weight I get is from Pro, who explains several impacts within the context of the resolution and today's society. Con's case could have minimized those impacts, but it simply hasn't yet.
Vote Placed by YYW 1 year ago
YYW
Lee001kasmicTied
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: This was cool to watch, and I like video debates. I think you both presented yourself reasonably well, and it was interesting to see you guys kind of work through the issues that the topic presents. I vote PRO because she weighed the harm to society if legal over whether it was illegal, and showed well enough that it's less harmful if not illegal more persuasively than CON showed that weed is so harmful that it should be illegal. I encourage both of you guys to do these in the future, too. This was neat to see.
Vote Placed by Kozu 1 year ago
Kozu
Lee001kasmicTied
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: See comments