The Instigator
chrisjohnson
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Locke33
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points

Should we prosecute steroid users at a federal level

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 5 votes the winner is...
Locke33
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,306 times Debate No: 29308
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

chrisjohnson

Con

first round for acceptance
Locke33

Pro

I accept and look forward to this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
chrisjohnson

Con

chrisjohnson forfeited this round.
Locke33

Pro

Hello and good luck.

First steroids are an illegal drug just like cocaine, weed(in some cases) it is a controlled substance just like these and is very harmfful. Here is what criminal attorney.com says on the illegalities of steroids,"Federal and most state laws dictate that the sales of anabolic steroids, possession of steroids, or possession of steroids with intent to sell, are all classified as felonies. Any individual who is convicted of the sale of steroids, or possesses steroids unlawfully with intent to sell, may be penalized by up to five years in prison under federal law. That same individual may face more than 5 years of punishment, depending on their states law. Almost every state has sanctioned various laws placing anabolic steroids in the Controlled Substance category."[1]

Steroids are very harmful you could say that's a choice someone makes when they take them ok then same with other drugs so if you are going to argue your point you are basically arguing for drugs to not be prosecuted at a federal level just like drugs, "Drug defendants comprised 33% of defendants in criminal cases filed in federal court in 2006. Immigration defendants made up 20% of cases filed in 2006."[2]

Drugs and steroids are one in the same and since drugs like cocaine are prosecuted in federal courts so should steroids.
Debate Round No. 2
chrisjohnson

Con

chrisjohnson forfeited this round.
Locke33

Pro

Since my opponent keeps forfitting I will do nothing but post my sources for the last round.

[1]http://www.criminalattorney.com...

[2]http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov...

Hoping my opponent shows up...
Debate Round No. 3
chrisjohnson

Con

chrisjohnson forfeited this round.
Locke33

Pro

Locke33 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
chrisjohnson

Con

chrisjohnson forfeited this round.
Locke33

Pro

My opponent has not posted any opposing argument. So he has conceded the debate or just agrees I suppose.

Please vote.

I would love a debate about this with an opponent that will debate me,

Thanks
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Locke33 4 years ago
Locke33
Dam forgot to put my sources links in bottom of first post I will in third round.
Posted by malcolmxy 4 years ago
malcolmxy
darnit...I was hoping you were "Pro". oh well, good luck.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
chrisjohnsonLocke33Tied
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 Checkmark1 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: ff
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
chrisjohnsonLocke33Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: No vote. Con's forfeiture balances against the spam messaging by Pro. I had this debate in my favorites and would have voted for Pro were it not for that little stunt.
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
chrisjohnsonLocke33Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
chrisjohnsonLocke33Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro presented the only arguments and sources. Con forfeited.
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 4 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
chrisjohnsonLocke33Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made more convincing arguments, didn't forfeit first or as much, was the only one to use sources.