The Instigator
xitzandrewx
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
wierdman
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Swap Tobacco with Marijuana

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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/1/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 912 times Debate No: 18140
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

xitzandrewx

Pro

I think banning tobacco (Cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco etc.) and legalizing Marijuana would have positive effects for the world. Marijuana has medicinal uses and is much less harmful and addicting than Tobaccos. Tobaccos are one of the leading causes of death on earth, spawning various cancers and causing billions to be spent on medical treatment, anti-smoke campaigns, and rehabilitation programs.
wierdman

Con

I accept the challenge and i wish my opponent luck.

I will also like to ask that my opponent provide reasonable sources to back up his words. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
xitzandrewx

Pro

First thing: Clarifying what I mean by "swapping".
When I said "banning", I most definitely did not mean a prohibition style ban on tobacco. The economical and political effects of such an act would be disastrous, and it would end in failure. What I meant is piling political pressure (higher taxes, banning smoking in places like playgrounds and theme parks, etc.) on smokers and tobacco companies so it would practically disappear from American society. From personal experience, my uncle finally agreed with the family it was time to quit when Washington (state) decided to raise cigarette taxes.

Speaking of prohibitions, like the one of alcohol in the 1920s, it ended in failure. Likewise, the prohibition of Marijuana is... failing. And it is costing a lot.

-cost of active law enforcement
-cost of prosecution (and defense!) of accused offenders
-cost of incarceration of convicted offenders
-hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue that would be generated if drugs were legal and taxed
-cost of foster care and social services for children of incarcerated offenders
Taken from the Marijuana legalization Organization website "the price of keeping Marijuana illegal" page.
http://www.mjlegal.org...

And all that money is coming from YOUR pocket, a.k.a. US tax dollars. If Marijuana was legal, all that extra spending cash could be put to health care, education, and other things.
wierdman

Con

Thank you for replying.

I would like to begin in pointing out that my opponent completely changed the entire debate. I accepted this debate on terms that i would be debating against the replacement of tobacco with Marijuana, if my opponents intentions were to place taxes on consumers, then he should have further elaborated on it during the introduction round. The fact that my opponent has changed the entire topic as well as the content of this debate in the middle of the round( round 2), should be looked upon when casting your point for conduct. (thank you)

Argument.

My opponent have provided no sensible for me to work with, so i will start by stating my point of view then moving on to attack the little information he provided to back up his claims.

Contention one: prohibition

Not to sound ignorant, but my opponent seems to believe that just because a certain price or prohibition was or rather is imposed on something would result in its sudden extinction. The fact is that if we place high taxes on these goods to the point were many would lack the financial capability of acquiring the goods, these people would look for an alternative way to acquire it not because they want to break the law but because they are sick (addiction). we see this in every day life were people are constantly forced to buy certain goods not because they want the product but because they crave or rather are addicted to the substance. My opponent needs to understand that there are illegal ways to acquire legal substances.

Contention two: Marijuana

I agree that the cost of prohibition on marijuana is rather high; however the plan that my opponent proposed is simply not the best answer. Putting restrictions on certain places will require the United States constant economic supervision. The United States government would have to spend huge amounts of money just to regulate the production of this product and distribution of this product. Until we find a better method in which this product could be regulated, then there is no point in reforming the current prohibition.

In conclusion, My opponents idea of legalization and regulation is highly flawed as it presents no economic or social benefits.
Debate Round No. 2
xitzandrewx

Pro

xitzandrewx forfeited this round.
wierdman

Con

Since My opponent has forfeited the round, i presume that he has forfeited the debate in my favor.
in conclusion, my opponent has forfeited the round to me thus pronouncing me the winner of the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by jat93 5 years ago
jat93
You need to clarify... Sure it might have some positive effects but what if the effects were overwhelmingly negative and outweighed the positives? I might consider taking this debate if you clarify that con's job is to prove that the negative results of "swapping tobacco with marijuana" would outweigh the positives. Legalizing both of them would be far more beneficial to American society.
Posted by ryan_thomas 5 years ago
ryan_thomas
They should both be legal.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
xitzandrewxwierdmanTied
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: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by headphonegut 5 years ago
headphonegut
xitzandrewxwierdmanTied
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 Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
xitzandrewxwierdmanTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering Darkhearth's multi-account vote.
Vote Placed by darkhearth 5 years ago
darkhearth
xitzandrewxwierdmanTied
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: Con was active and had a better argument.