The Instigator
Sekeido
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Kinesis
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

Should smoking be illegalized?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2010 Category: Health
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 965 times Debate No: 11512
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

Sekeido

Pro

Many people have unnecessarily died from smoking cigarettes, causing lung cancer. If smoking were illegalized, less people would die every year. Smoking kills 440,000 per year. Think of how many people's lives could be saved simply by passing the law to illegalize smoking. It would be fantastic.
Kinesis

Con

Thanks to Sekeido for presenting this topic. I shall present some of arguments in support of the resolution that will encompass Pros first round as-well.

(Freedom of choice)

The government does have a responsibility to protect its citizens. However, it also has a responsibility to protect their freedom of choice. The risks of smoking are well documented and publicised to anyone who looks into it, so the vast majority of people who smoke are well aware of the risks. The government does not ban rock-climbing or parachuting. It does not ban unhealthy foods, taking no exercise or alcohol. Why? Because these are personal choices by people aware of the risks and the government has no right to infringe on them.

(Past lessons)

Exactly the same proposal was made in the 1920's in America - the alcohol prohibition. The disastrous consequences of limiting a recreational drug used by a large percent of the population became vividly apparent then. All banning smoking would do would be lead to crime and contraband, and likely not decrease the amount of smoking at all. Also, the government earns a major source of income from tax revenue from tobacco sales - eliminating it would take away a major source of income for national health and other resources.

(Forbidden fruit)

What would making smoking illegal actually achieve? Drugs are illegal and they are still widely used. People start smoking through peer pressure, and the more risky an action is the more exciting it becomes. Making smoking illegal would make them more attractive if anything. All making smoking illegal would do is increase crime, infringe on peoples freedom and would likely not even decrease the number of people who smoke.
Debate Round No. 1
Sekeido

Pro

My opponent has raised some excellent points. I really enjoyed reading the "forbidden fruit" part.

The alcohol prohibition didn't seem to end well, I have to agree with you. It did seem to open the eyes of the public, however. More people seem to have certain morals about smoking and drinking. Today's younger generations are told not to drink, smoke, or do any drugs for recreational use. Some are even told so by their smoking, drinking, and sometimes even drug-abusing parents or guardians. People seem to be more healthy when going about the situation. Tomorrow seems to be sure of one thing: No drugs. Why not start now? Why not prepare the minors of today for a future of health, intelligence, and dignity by illegalizing what would surely be abused if not illegalized?
Kinesis

Con

Pro has not really posted any real refutations of my three arguments, so I will respond to what he has written.

Pro brings up a single argument - that people are more aware of the dangers of drugs like nicotine and that it will soon be a thing of the past. This ignores the majority of my argumentation, so I extend all the points not addressed. Regardless, I would like to see some evidence for this assertion. As far as I am aware, there has been no significant decrease in drug or nicotine use in recent years. He asks why we should not prepare the minors of today by banning smoking. Well, this is really irrelevant because smoking IS banned for minors in the vast majority of countries. They still do it regardless, so what would change if a full ban was enacted? Nothing significant.
Debate Round No. 2
Sekeido

Pro

Sekeido forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
Sigh...
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Dingo7 6 years ago
Dingo7
SekeidoKinesisTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by carman16 7 years ago
carman16
SekeidoKinesisTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
SekeidoKinesisTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by us5halls 7 years ago
us5halls
SekeidoKinesisTied
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