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

Should Marijuana be Legalized?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 590 times Debate No: 23013
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




Marijuana should be Legalized because...

Contention One:

When you make something illegal you make it more desirable to the average rebellious person. For example, when the United States introduced Prohibition in the Volstead Act in 1919 and as the 18th Amendment of The United States Constitution in 1920 it made "bootlegging" ( the illegal transportation, consummation, an production of alcoholic beverages ) more desirable for men such as the famous bootlegger Al Capone in Chicago and the "moon shiners" of the Southeast part of the United States because they could make money on it and for the adventure of going against the "Feds". Al Capone made so much money off of bootlegging because he could set a higher premium on the product because of how difficult he could make it seem to produce and sell the product. So in theory, making something legal takes the adventure out of the making, consuming, and selling of an illegal product.

Contention Two:

Legalizing Marijuana would cause a dramatic drop in organized crime in many states, because many of the known gangs main form of getting money is selling and making Marijuana.

Contention Three

Legalizing Marijuana would also give people with Crones disease a useful way to eliminate pain. Many people with Crones disease are forced to illegally get marijuana because a hospital did not clear them to receive medical marijuana.


1. increases users

His argument seems to be if we ban things it will increase users. First, this is false. The drug war has come a long way. There are 9.5 million fewer people doing drugs now then before, the illegalization is a big part of this process. [1] One of the things, other then the extra education and deterrence involved in lowering the users, is supply reduction. Seizures of meth, heroin, and other drugs is spiking upward and is decreasing the amount of drugs being sold on the streets, making it harder to sell and hence lowering users. [1]

"There have been many successes on the supply side of the drug fight, as well. For example, Customs officials have made major seizures along the U.S.-Mexico border during a six-month period after September 11th, seizing almost twice as much as the same period in 2001. At one port in Texas, seizures of methamphetamine are up 425% and heroin by 172%. Enforcement makes a difference—traffickers’ costs go up with these kinds of seizure" [1]

My opponent then claims that alcohol and drugs compare, and look prohibition failed. I agree, banning alcohol is bad, but the drug war is different. My stats on the drug war SPECIFICALLY trump laws that are about alcohol. So, alcohol prohibition failed, but banning drugs has not. Unless my opponent proves the drug war is not working, then I win the argument with specific stats.

2. Crime

My opponent claims it would lower gang crime. This is not the case. First, marijuana is only part of the selling of the overall drug war, hence there would still be violence over the other harder drugs. Now we must also ask if it will actually legalize it? There will likely be a limit of 21 or 18 to the drug, so there would be illegal gangs and other crimes amongst the youth still. The youth are a significant portion of marijuana sales, so making it legal for adult people woudl do little to lower crimes on the border, and in the country in general.

3. Medicine

Marijuana is considered a narcotic, and it not an approved medicine by the FDA, and this means it is not healthy. There are NO smoked approved medicines by the FDA. Opium and morphine where considered a valuable medicine, yet now these drugs are illegal and have been proven to have detriments. Unless my opponent can actually prove it is a safe and reliable medicines, then the argument fails. Also he ignores the things marijuana "heal" have alternatives, so the argument still fails.


C1: Legalization would increase users

I just wrote another debate argument, and am tired, I will be lazy and quote:

"The consequences of legalization became evident when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in 1975 that the state could not interfere with an adult’s possession of marijuana for personal consumption in the home. The court’s ruling became a green light for marijuana use. Although the ruling was limited to persons 19 and over, teens were among those increasingly using marijuana. According to a 1988 University of Alaska study, the state’s 12 to 17-year-olds used marijuana at more than twice the national average for their age group. Alaska’s residents voted in 1990 to recriminalize possession of marijuana, demonstrating their belief that increased use was too high a price to pay. " [2]

"During the 19th Century, morphine was legally refined from opium and hailed as a miracle drug. Many soldiers on both sides of the Civil War who were given morphine for their wounds became addicted to it, and this increased level of addiction continued throughout the nineteenth century and into the twentieth. In 1880, many drugs, including opium and cocaine, were legal — and, like some drugs today, seen as benign medicine not requiring a doctor’s care and oversight. Addiction skyrocketed. There were over 400,000 opium addicts in the U.S. That is twice as many per capita as there are today." [2]

So legalizing drugs actually raises users.

C2: Health effects

So, there are many effect that are from marijuana that are detrimental. The largest one is perception. Now this not only harms the user[s], but also everyone near him. He may have poor memory, poor judgements, delayed reactions, and these effects on actions and learning can last for weeks, days, before they fully wear off. [3] Now, why is this important? First, it means it hurts them, never want that. But more importantly, it hurts everyone around them! if hey drive, they will kill people or hit cars. Get aggressive etc. [3] So, it not only hurts the user, but everyone around him.

Also, this is related to the argument above. It will raise users, therefore increase the amount of these accidents.

Also, as all drugs marijuana is addictive, and people who try to quit it go into withdrawals. [3]


"Marijuana increases heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug." [3]



VOTE PRO, I am to lazy to make a longer argument so....

Debate Round No. 1


iObject18 forfeited this round.


Really tempted to say I win
Debate Round No. 2


Well first of all, how did you get this debate 16kadams? I thought I challenged my friend muzicfreek to it? but anyway, your arguments are very good but I'm new to the world of forensics so I do not have a rebuttal for you. very good man! thanks you but my coach said I'm not aloud to friend other people besides my team mates ( musicfreek and Asp111 ) otherwise I would friend you. thank you and good bye


I take that as an FF....... SO vote for me.... And I thank your for the debate :D
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
Thanks asp.
Posted by Asp111 4 years ago
Good job 16kadams, and good arguements to both of you. See Henry, can't always win.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
Accepted it to reserve it.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
I will accept later
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Are you kidding? If I cared enough, his case wouldn't last two seconds.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
What an indomitable case!!!!!!!!!!!!!! D:
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: ff and concessious