The Instigator
16kadams
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
Dave_82
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The current federal drug war should be ended

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
16kadams
Started: 3/3/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,363 times Debate No: 21701
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (17)
Votes (3)

 

16kadams

Pro

1st round acceptance

drug war:

"The War on Drugs is a controversial campaign of prohibition and foreign military aid and military intervention being undertaken by the United States government, with the assistance of participating countries, intended to both define and reduce the illegal drug trade."
http://en.wikipedia.org...

basically all drugs (meth -> marijuana) are illegal. I argue legalize all the drugs!

This is the current drug war we argue.
Dave_82

Con

First off I would like to thank 16kadams for issuing this debate. While I am for legalization of marijuana, it is the other drugs that I will be arguing against
Debate Round No. 1
16kadams

Pro

C1: Drug war isn't working

The drug war simply isn't working. [1] Further drug decriminalization works. When Portugal did it they had a 50% reduction in just 10 years. [2] The dutch have legalized marijuana (or essentially have) and they have the lowest cannabis rates. [3]

This actually I find interesting. Marijuana usage isn't that much lower that in 1975, cigaretts are actually lower then marijuana! And cigarettes are legal, and more easily accesible. [15]

C2: Cost

The goverment spends almost 1800$ per second on the drug war. [4] This estimate says the feds spent 500$ per second, 15 billion dollars per year. [5] Another estimate says spent 44 billion dollars on thsi drug war! [6] OPERTUNITY TO SAVE MONEY HERE!

C3: added revanue

If we legalized drugs revanue would icnrease by 33 billion. [6] California will raise billions just from legalization of marijuana. [7] A cato study showed legalization ofdrugs would lead to 40 billion in savings. [7, 8]

C4: Would let people out of jail

Even China puts less people into jail then we do. We incarnate 2.4 million, them 1.3. [9, 10] Drug offenses are nearly 60% of people in jail. [11] Legalizing drugs meanstting out 59.6% of the people in jail. This ties into cost, this would save money. Over half a million people in jail are there because of drug usage. [12, 13] Since the drug war started prison numbers increases. [14]

Conclusion:


Legalize all the drugs! Vote PRO I am tired, I will add one more argument (if I remember) next round.



Sources:

http://www.guardian.co.uk... [1]
http://www.linkedin.com... [2]
http://www.reuters.com... [3]
http://actionamerica.org... [4]
http://www.drugsense.org... [5]
http://articles.cnn.com... [6]
http://www.cato.org... [7]
http://www.cato.org... [8]
http://drugwarfacts.org... [9]
Shapiro, David, "Banking on Bondage: Private Prisons and Mass Incarceration," American Civil Liberties Union (New York, NY: November 2, 2011), p. 38. [10]
http://druglibrary.org... [11]
http://stopthedrugwar.org... [12]
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov... [13]
http://www.drugabuse.gov... [15]
http://druglibrary.net... [14]
Dave_82

Con

1. Just because the current strategy isn't working is no reason to just throw in the towel. When a srrategy fails, you come up with a new one, you don't give up.

2. and 3. There is a huge cost to maintaining justice, but there is also revenue inherent in the legal system through fines and things like that

All illegal drugs combined kill 1/10 the people each year that cigarettes and alchohol do. (1) This is due in no small part to the fact that these things are legal and easily accessible. From this you can infer that drug related deaths would skyrocket if they were legalized.

http://druglibrary.net.... See headline 3
Debate Round No. 2
16kadams

Pro

~refutations~

Numero uno:

You concede the drug war isn't working, and now claim that we should change strategies. That is against the resolution:

"The current federal drug war should be ended"

As it does not apply to the resolution it should not be counted.

Dos y tres:

My opponent concedes the cost, then diverges into revenues through fines. Already (as of march 7th) The drug war in 2012 already cost our state and local goverment 7 billion dollars. [1] Also, you must find how fines increase revenue past 7 billion, and even then you must find how fines pay for the 15 billion used in 2010. Also this DEA subset "DEA resource for parents" Shows criminal charges are pressed much of the time. [2] The Government can jail you if your in control of more illicit drugs (meth heroin etc). [3]

"The United States leads the world in the number of people incarcerated in federal and state correctional facilities. There are currently more than 2 million people in American prisons or jails. Approximately one-quarter of those people held in U.S. prisons or jails have been convicted of a drug offense. The United States incarcerates more people for drug offenses than any other country. With an estimated 6.8 million Americans struggling with drug abuse or dependence, the growth of the prison population continues to be driven largely by incarceration for drug offenses." [4]

Also the fines must pay for the guys in jail... So tell me: Do these fines create revenues of 7-15 billion? No probably not.

~His case~

His case revolves around the "care for the citizens drugs hurt people". Illicit drug usage only kills 19,000 people. [5] Alcohol is linked to 75,000 deaths. [6] SO you have the mindset of... drugs are bad allowing them would increase users therefore more people die, correct? First I have provided evidence that legalizing drugs would decrease users... But how about this:

"fear [of legalisation] is based in large part on the presumption that more people would take drugs under a legal regime. That presumption may be wrong. There is no correlation between the harshness of drug laws and the incidence of drug-taking: citizens living under tough regimes (notably America but also Britain) take more drugs, not fewer. Embarrassed drug warriors blame this on alleged cultural differences, but even in fairly similar countries tough rules make little difference to the number of addicts: harsh Sweden and more liberal Norway have precisely the same addiction rates." [7]

So banning doesn't actually help, therefore no lives are saved with a ban. Also as I stated when Portugal decriminalized drugs usage in these drugs decreased and the goverment says its a success. [8] [9] 5 years after the decriminalization overdoses fell and HIV doses from heroin needles declined as well. [10]

The point is, legalization decreases users and banning them doesn't have a link to decreased drug usage, therefore in your logic illeglaization has no benefit, and under my stats total decriminalization lowers users, therefore using the same logic I have proven legalization is better. Also, the police in raids kill many innocent people. [11] 47,000 people total have died because of the drug war, [12] and therefore legalization would still save lives.


~Argument I promised~

The drug war... is... UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The drug war violates the limited governments role given by the constitution. [13] There is no amendment written to ban drugs in the first place too. [12] Why does it violate the 10th amendment? Remember how it gives all in-enumerated power to the people or states? As there is no enumerated power, the drug laws should be a state issue. If we added an amendment, it would be ok, but the illicit drug war violates the 10th amendment, and as it violates the 10th amendment this war should not exist.

VOTE PRO.


[1] http://www.drugsense.org...
[2] http://www.getsmartaboutdrugs.com...
[3] http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov...
[4] http://www.justicepolicy.org...
[5] http://drug-rehabs.org...
[6] http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
[7] http://www.economist.com...
[8] http://www.time.com...
[9] http://www.forbes.com...
[10] http://www.scientificamerican.com...
[11] http://www.cato.org...
[12] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[13] http://www.druglibrary.org...
Dave_82

Con

Sorry to put my sources first, but my phone can't go far enough down the text to enter them. Speaking of which, in the numbers I use below, 3.8 should be 3.6 and it's too far down to correct. Sorry about that.
1. http://crime.about.com...
2. http://www.alternet.org...

1. It applies to the resolution in as much as even though we agree that the current strategies being used in the drug war aren't working, I am offering changing strategies as opposed to ending it completely. For example, one failed strategy is the mandatory drug sentencing laws (1). This could be replaced by mandatory inflated fines. This would bring in a massive amount of revenue and solve the issues of overcrowding and state supported prisoners as far as drugs are concerned. I will give numbers and sources in the next argument.

2. & 3. As mentioned above, replacing jail time with inflated fines would bring in a much greater amount of revenue. More than 1.8 million people are arrested each year on drug charges (2). If this jail time were replaced by inflated fines then they would be left on the street to get caught again and pay more fines. Users would begin to consider them a cost of the habit and dealers a cost of business. It would be impossible to predict accurate numbers concerning repeat offenders in this situation, but for the sake of the argument I will assume an average of one repeat offense per charge. This would bring the number from 1.8 million to 3.8 million. If you assume an average of $1000 per offense, which is pretty lowball considering the increased amounts for people with higher amounts and dealers. This would create an additional 7.2 billion dollars a year, not to mention the money saved by not putting them in jail.

4. I didn't broach this last round for fear of offending people, but I will this time. If you let everybody out of jail who are in on drug charges, you have to think about who you are letting out. In my experience, the people I knew on drugs harder than marijuana were not above stealing to feed their habits. By letting out everyone on drug charges you are also letting out a certain number of thieves and junkies. Not that everyone on drugs fall into those categories, some do

5. Technically any federal law not covered by the constitution would violate the tenth amendment, so I think changing that would not be logical, as there are many federal laws, too many to change.
Debate Round No. 3
16kadams

Pro

1. "The current federal drug war should be ended" Your proposal is not the current resolution, therefore is irrelavant. Also there is not a 1000$ fine for drug usage... Also as I stated there are milliond of people in jail and on probation that suck gunds from the goverment. [1] find me 44 billion dollars of revanue from the drug wars. [2] Actually, the costs and the possible revanue! SO now oyu need to find 84 billion dollars of revanue from the drug wa that saves us. [3] You will not be able to, hence this is futile.

2 and 3.

Inflating fines is against the resolution, CURRENT DRUG WAR. Also 12.7 million people on drugs. [4] Lets be realistic, we fine 3 million people 1000$. 3 billion dollars. Now we have paid for 81 billion. Lets say we jhire chuck norris and get all 12 million, thats only 12 billion. Were still in debt 72 billion. You would need to have a fine of 7000$. But firstly, this is the current drug war, so any change in policies is a red herring.

4. My opponents case is illogical here. If your arrested for crack and they have you for other charges then you'll stay in jail until ou have sevred your time. Drug use is only mainly linked to robbery. [5] Legalization ofdrugs would actually lower crime and save lives. [6] Legalizing even just marijuana would lower crime, save lives, and lower users. [7] Small scale legalizations work, as do larger ones. Portugaul decriminalized all drugs, like a small scale legalizaion, and it works. [8] Why not do it here? Loers crime users lowers deficits increases revanue. All a win!

5. I agree, there are to many unconntitutional laws. It would be logical in a conservatives or libertarians mind! Scale back the unconstitutional laws! "Let's obey the constitution!" ~ Ron Paul.

10th amendment

He conceded that it broke this law, hence as its unconstutional it should be ended.

VOTE PRO






[1] http://www.drugwarfacts.org...;
[2] http://articles.cnn.com...
[3] http://www.cato.org...
[4] http://druglibrary.org...
[5] http://www.ncvc.org...
[6] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
[7] http://www.psychedelic-library.org...
[8] http://www.time.com...
Dave_82

Con

I accepted this debate based on the idea of changing the drug war as opposed to ending it outright as my opponent suggests. If changing the rules of the drug war invalidates the resolution, then I must concede the debate.
Debate Round No. 4
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ahopele 2 years ago
ahopele
Well done 16kadams. Probably the only debate I've seen you do in which I agree with you both before and after the debate.
Posted by Dave_82 2 years ago
Dave_82
Also, the $1000 should be $2000. I need a computer...
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
@LK

Am undecided
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
@Contra

I am undecided
Posted by Lordknukle 2 years ago
Lordknukle
What has happened to you, 16?
Posted by Contra 2 years ago
Contra
I am surprised that Pro took this debate... a rather libertarian view on a social issue (I agree with PRO).
Posted by imabench 2 years ago
imabench
Dave_82 has some pretty bad arguments...
Posted by THEBOMB 2 years ago
THEBOMB
yes, but the system you are debating for the US is radically different then Portugal's haha oh well...
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
I believe in both XD They both tie in technically as decriminalization is similar but on a smaller scale.
Posted by THEBOMB 2 years ago
THEBOMB
err....if you actually read what Portugal did you'd see that instead of going to JAIL drug addicts went to rehab....the criminal justice system was still involved "Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail."

I believe this is from your (8) source.....

If you legalize it the criminal justice system cannot be involved at all as the police cannot arrest these people. You present a case for decriminalization not legalization.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by SuburbiaSurvivor 2 years ago
SuburbiaSurvivor
16kadamsDave_82Tied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 2 years ago
THEBOMB
16kadamsDave_82Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con conceded.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 2 years ago
1Historygenius
16kadamsDave_82Tied
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: FF
Research this debate: United States