The Instigator
qf200011
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
Consummator
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Should they make cigars illegal

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 9 votes the winner is...
Consummator
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,315 times Debate No: 30675
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (9)

 

qf200011

Pro

They should have by now but they haven't. Should they make cigars illegal? It kills many and makes them waist a lot of money. They also cause cancer and make it harder to breath. I don't think they should make it legal.
Consummator

Con

I'm not sure if you are joking or not but if you aren't please propose a genuine case in round two.

The argument that it's a waste of money fails because nearly every single luxury item is a waste of money if we don't believe in the benefits of emotional pleasure. You would have to disprove the entire performing arts and all pleasure-based being abolished to prove it to be a waste of money.

Cigars do not cause cancer, over-using them does. this is the consumer's issue and there is therapy for those addicted to any form of nicotine (this opening up in demand for therapy jobs decreases unemployment by increasing demand for them).

Cigars are also extremely important to many Caribbean cultures and are almost as sacred as the shisha is to the Arabs, beer is to the Germans and wine is to the french. Whilst it does harm health we have to respect different people's beliefs before outright declaring something illegal for no apparent reason.
Debate Round No. 1
qf200011

Pro

They should have by now but they haven't. Should they make cigars illegal? It kills many and makes them waist a lot of money. They also cause cancer and make it harder to breath. I don't think they should make it legal.
True they cause cancer after a while but they also have nicotine. Once they start it is hard for them to stop. When they do try they might succeed but they still are damaged forever. Once they start they also start having like 1-3 packs a day. It might be for cultures but it still kills. If they could they should have laws to limit packs to one per week using a license. They could then limit deaths.
Consummator

Con

The entire first paragraph of my opponent's round two speech has been copy and pasted from round two most evident by the same misspelling of the word 'waste' as 'waist'. I already rebutted this and shall not be doing so again since this would be quite pointless and trivial.

The only new point raised by my opponent is this new idea of :If they could they should have laws to limit packs to one per week using a license. They could then limit deaths." Not only is it virtually impossible to limit someone to this as they can easily go from one shop to another buy two packs but having each shopkeeper thinking they only bought one (since a licence can be used at both locations) but it is also very unfair to demand someone who wants to host a party where there will be many of their friends who also want to smoke cigars but expect the host to buy it for them (perhaps subsidising him or her to do so).

This shall sum up my round two.
Debate Round No. 2
qf200011

Pro

By the way I was using a mobile device and it automactically copy and paste and plus this is my first debate I am only getting used to this debate website.
Most chemicals in cigars also may pass on to others near the main smoker. This causes double the deaths because of carbon monoxide. They is only for the U.S.A so if a smoker wanted to still smoke he could still move to a different country to live in. Many kids are ding from there parents. If adults also smoke they make there house more unpleasant making them anti-social.

Well this is it for my last debate on round three I am 13 so I am not great in spelling so I apologize for that but still, good job and good luck.
Consummator

Con

Firstly, regarding passive smoking. This is why smoking in public places is already illegal, it is not a reason to completely make cigars illegal if smoked privately with other consenting smokers.

"If a smoker wanted to still smoke he could still move to a different country to live in." It is unfair to command a smoker to move countries simply because they want to smoke a cigar as opposed to a cigarette, it is also a violation of personal liberty and disrespecting that many living in USA may want their heritage respected and valued as part of society.

"If adults also smoke they make there[their] house more unpleasant making them anti-social." Smoking in front of children is already illegal and advised against. This is actually a form of child abuse (to smoke in their face). This is why most parents smoke outside in the back garden for house or balcony for apartment to avoid choking their children, this is also not a reason to make cigars illegal.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Beastman0114 4 years ago
Beastman0114
This should be interesting,
Posted by jp1999 4 years ago
jp1999
Con already makes a very good point, I think I know who might win this.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by sweetbreeze 4 years ago
sweetbreeze
qf200011ConsummatorTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. All votes to Pro.
Vote Placed by sbaik610 4 years ago
sbaik610
qf200011ConsummatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Send people to a different country..?
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
qf200011ConsummatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con soundly rebutted each and every one of Pro's arguments. The best case Pro made for making cigars illegal was that second-hand smoke kills; i.e., someone's considered decision to smoke cigars despite the harm affects others negatively. Con pointed out this can be addressed by prohibiting smoking near someone else. Thus, Pro's case for a total ban of cigars lacks the burden of proof.
Vote Placed by Subutai 4 years ago
Subutai
qf200011ConsummatorTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter-VB DebaterAgent.
Vote Placed by DebaterAgent 4 years ago
DebaterAgent
qf200011ConsummatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:41 
Reasons for voting decision: hard to decide but i say qf200011 won
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
qf200011ConsummatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pros arguments were silly. Saying smokers can move, but as con rightly stated, forcing so done to move because of a simple lifestyle choice is idiotic. Con also noted many of the reforms pro talked about have been banned already. Pro failed in this debate to uphold his BOP and convince me to change the status quo .
Vote Placed by famer 4 years ago
famer
qf200011ConsummatorTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't feel that kingsjester's vote is so justified, so I will just counterVB Majducator's source vote.
Vote Placed by Majducator 4 years ago
Majducator
qf200011ConsummatorTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter Voting kingjester
Vote Placed by kingsjester 4 years ago
kingsjester
qf200011ConsummatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con successfully proved that you would have to prove that all performing arts should be illegal in order to prove cigars should be illegal.