The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
8 Points

The Production and Selling of Cigarettes is Murder

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/17/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,608 times Debate No: 26281
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)




I ask the qustion: is the production and SELLING of cigarettes murder??

How is it NOT muder? Every item ever sold has it's purpose. What purpose does a packet of cigarettes have??? That's nearly like selling cocaine or something! There IS no purpose..

If it isn't murder, than maybe it is manslaughter.

That's basically my opening statement.


Greetings Affirmative.

I assume there is no need for definitions, the topic is fairly straightforward anyways. I am going to argue that producing and selling cigarettes is not murdering anyone.
BoP on Pro to show why its murder.

Goodluck, state your case Pro.

Debate Round No. 1


Good luck to you also.

Do you agree with smoking at all??

How ISN'T it murder?? Or manslaughter. It kills, does it not??? Do you know what is IN those things?? The following chemicals are contained in cigarettes:

Acetic Acid: vinegar
Acetone: nail polish remover
Ammonia: cleaning agent
Arsenic: poison, used as an insecticide
Butane: lighter fluid
Cadmium: found in batteries
DDT: insecticide outlawed by the US Government in the 1970"s because of human
teratogenic (birth defect) properties
Ethanol: alcohol
Formaldehyde: substance used to preserve body tissue; a known carcinogen
Hexamine: barbecue lighter
Hydrogen cyanide: gas chamber poison
Methanol: rocket fuel
Naphthalene: moth balls
Nitrobenzene: gasoline additive
Toluene: an industrial solvent
Vinyl chloride: plastic piping

You know ... I am a female, and so I do paint my nails and do HAVE things like nail polish remover. On the bottle, CLEARLY it says:

Keep out of reach of children
Do not swallow ----- Main POINT
Read safety directions before using
Highly flammable
Poison - not to be taken ---- another main point!

I mean obviously it isn't instant death. It's slow and dragged out. Making people look older and their teeth gross and decreasing the healthy function of the lungs. I'm fifteen, I probably shouldn't know some of this. But my parents are both smokers, and it's hard to know that they're dying from something so stupid.

I also apologise for not knowing how this site works :) I joined ... Today :D


I'm Sorry, I should not have accepted this debate. I learned that you are new from your last post, and while I am not old, I'm older than you and its bad practice for members like me to debate new members, fault is mine, I appologise.

However, I will still attempt to negate the given resolution. To do that I will point out some flaws in my opponents case and state my own arguments as well.

reversed BoP
2) dangerous chemicals

Freedom of choice

1) Burden of Proof.
My opponents case works from the assumption that if something cannot be proven to be the case, then the opposite must be true. Quote from Pro: 'How ISN'T it murder?' So she assumes that everybody knows that it is murder and that any other notion is a compeltely alien idea. However, the resolution states: 'The Production and Selling of Cigarettes is Murder.' In which case Pro must answer the simple question of why? Why is the motion true? This burden of proof remains unfulfilled as per Pro's previous post. She did not answer that question or affirm the resolution. We did not enter this debate with the pre-concieved mindset that a certain side was right, so whatever claims are made must be supported.

2) Harmful Chemicals.
The chemicals listed by Pro do not prove that selling cigarrettes is murder. It merely proves that there are dangerous chemicals in cigarrettes, which is not murder, as I will address in my first argument

1) Freedom of choice
Consider this senario: You have a knife and you wrap it up in paper with warning signs all over it. Let's say that you wish to sell such and item, which is lawful in whatever country you live. Now say that someone comes and buys your knife. He reads the warning labels on it but proceeds to open the parcel up anyways and commences cutting himself. This man is harming himself because he enjoys it, even if it will lead to his death. Whose fault is it if he dies? Is it the seller or the customer? Ultimately, its the customers fault for killing himself. He chose that he would like to buy the knife and cut himself apart inwhich he has full responcibility for his actions. It is unfortunate that it happens but the person who sold it can have no blame. The seller after all went through the effort to warn any customers that the product could be dangerous.

It is not possible to blame companies for the choices of their customers. Pro has not shown a reason to think otherwise, so I look forward to hear her case next round.

The resolution remains negated.
Debate Round No. 2


I apologise for my lack of knowledge in the actual WAY of debating ... I will learn more about all this site and such and may repost my argument another time in an orderly manner ...

Once again, I apologise for my stupidity and with that I withdraw ... Somehow ...

Thank you for being a worthy component and I'm sorry you can't say the same :)


:( all my fault... Im sorry, I urge voters to give conduct point to Pro.

Thank you Pro for the debate, it was a very interesting motion.

The resolution is negated. Debate concludes.
Debate Round No. 3


MuppetMunchkin forfeited this round.


Vote Con. Unless Pro wants to jump back into the debate.
Debate Round No. 4


MuppetMunchkin forfeited this round.


Victory for Con. Thanks Pro for the debate.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by pussyphat 5 years ago
If selling cigarettes is murder... then so is selling prescription drugs, fatty foods and anything that pollutes this planet. They are all drawn out killers technically. So to put the arguement forward of the smoking being murder technically everything on this planet can kill you in some form or another, which is why it is not a form of murder, maybe indirectly it is but that is not enough to call it murder.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Muted 5 years ago
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: FF. Realized I mistakenly voted for Pro. Following the example of DeFool, I will remove myself from the voting process for this debate.
Vote Placed by Torvald 5 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:25 
Reasons for voting decision: I would love to have voted for the Pro, as the Con initially requested. However, I simply could not work up a case for why Pro should receive anything but the reliable sources, having cited one source (the Con cited none). Con's conduct was much calmer, but it was the forfeiture by Pro that gave Con the conduct vote. Con's convincing argument is somewhat self-explanatory, given that he actually made an argument. Pro's grammar was disjointed. I do not agree with smoking, but Con unmistakably won.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Obey.