The Instigator
grantman
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
I-am-a-panda
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

marijuana should be legalised it would help us in the long run and get us out of debit

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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/13/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,711 times Debate No: 11114
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (9)

 

grantman

Pro

Ok this is my this is my first debate ever. so I am expecting to loose this battle on account I have poor grammar or what not but I just am curious to see if anyone
here can point out a link where it shows proof that marijuana has killed someone.

Its also 2am here I am having a brain freeze that I can't even think what side I would put
I am putting pro for I am for marijuana not killing anyone if that makes since. If I am suppose to put con than I apologize. like I said I have never done this debate thing before so why not start here where a professional can take me on.
So with that I start of by posting the links I have found that support my argument that marijuana has not killed anyone.
Here is the link http://drugwarfacts.org...
and I took the liberty of posting what it shows on the site
Annual Causes of Death in the United States
Tobacco 435,000^1
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,0001
Alcohol 85,000 ^1
Microbial Agents 75,000^1
Toxic Agents 55,000^1
Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,347^1
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000^2
Suicide 30,622^3
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000^1
Homicide 20,308^4
Sexual Behaviors 20,000^1
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,0001, ^5
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600^6
Marijuana 0

also here is what the subsection shows on the site as well
http://drugwarfacts.org... there is much more on there as well feel free to take a look
I have have posted what I felt was important of each section and the sources are on the site as well.
it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death.

8.Despite the widespread illicit use of cannabis there are very few if any instances of people dying from an overdose. In Britain, official government statistics listed five deaths from cannabis in the period 1993-1995 but on closer examination these proved to have been deaths due to inhalation of vomit that could not be directly attributed to cannabis (House of Lords Report, 1998). By comparison with other commonly used recreational drugs these statistics are impressive."

14.Although people may think that the Drug War targets drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' in 2008, 49.8 percent (half) of the 1,702,537 total arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana -- a total of 847,863. Of those, 754,224 people were arrested for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000 a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 were for possession alone.
TAKE A LOOK AT THAT CHART.
Well I am going to stop it there.
Again I am not looking to win a debate I am only looking for evidence that states it has killed so like the government says..

One other thing you should know about me. I don't even use marijuana. I haven't found the need for it. I also for a long time thought it was a horrible drug and never should be used and should be illegal until the simplest question came to me and I had nothing to back it up with which immediately made me switch sides. The question that was who has died from marijuana. My answer now is nobody

On to my second part which to me is a no brainier. if you go back to the statistics tobacco and alcohol have killed a lot of people in this world where as marijuana hasn't. even people with a poor diet have died more than alcohol. So why is it we legalize the 1st and 3rd annual cause of death in the US. but can't legalize marijuana.

http://www.saferchoice.org...
the site listed above is just another simple source I found that once again shows
Please also see the one above on the site
"1." since I don't know how to paste charts
2. There are hundreds of alcohol overdose deaths each year, yet there has never been a marijuana overdose death in history. The consumption of alcohol is also the direct cause of tens of thousands of deaths in the U.S. each year.
3. Alcohol is one of the most toxic drugs, and using just 10 times what one would use to get the desired effect can lead to death. Marijuana is one of – if not the – least toxic drugs, requiring thousands times the dose one would use to get the desired effect to lead to death. This "thousands times" is actually theoretical, since there has never been a recorded case of marijuana overdose.

4. Long-term marijuana use is far less harmful than long-term alcohol use.

There is little evidence, however, that long-term cannabis use causes permanent cognitive impairment, nor is there is any clear cause and effect relationship to explain the psychosocial associations.

There are some physical health risks, particularly the possibility of damage to the airways in cannabis smokers. Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for ‘recreational' purposes, cannabis could be rated to be a relatively safe drug.

6. There has never been a documented case of lung cancer in a marijuana-only smoker, and recent studies find that marijuana use is not associated with any type of cancer. The same cannot be said for alcohol, which has been found to contribute to a variety of long-term negative health effects, including cancers and cirrhosis of the liver.

There is a heck of a lot more to list but I think I got my point across.
I look forward to a great debate
I-am-a-panda

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate.

I do not disagree with my opponents stance on Marijuana as stated in Round 1. However, as with accordance with the Debate topic, he has not shown how it will get the U.S. out of debt, as I am presuming 'debit' is a misspelling of 'debt'.

As shown on this website, as of 21:04 GMT the U.S. is in $12,385,520,848,188 of debt. http://www.usdebtclock.org... number is constantly increasing and will be greater by the time my opponent reads it. My opponent must prove how legalisation of Marijuana would eliminate the U.S. debt.

I await my opponents response.
Debate Round No. 1
grantman

Pro

grantman forfeited this round.
I-am-a-panda

Con

I hope all is well with my opponent.

Nevertheless, my arguments stands, so I extend them and await my response.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
grantman

Pro

I apologize I have been really busy with working and school. I am sorry I didn't put my argument regarding putting us out of debt which is what I met not debit. I have no sources to back up what I am about to say and for all means vote for for con. What I have to say regarding getting us out of debt is simple..... If Marijuana was legalized it could put us out debt little by little. I did not mean by any means it would make us debt free. I only said it would help. Think about cigarettes. The tax the government puts on them eventually goes to help with funding sources to the governments wants. So if Marijuana was legalized and put into packages like cigarettes. The tax on them could help get us out of debt. On top of that the people they put behind bars for crimes related to marijuana would lower the amount of images in jail and that's another fee waked off the budget. I am under the assumption that if marijuana becomes legal if would create jobs for people unemployed which would lower the amount of money needed for welfare or what not. Those are some of the few things that i believe would help out. Again no sources but just know what is spent allready to get pot of the streets etc and taking that into account. I watched a documentry forget the name but will add it in the comments when i come across it. the 1930-1940's 12million spent. 1940-1952 2billion spent. 1960-1970's 9 billion spent. the 1980-1990's 220 billion spent. Who knows what they are spending now on the war on pot. it was quit funny. The movies the government would show our parents "i am 26" so like the mid 60's-70's "if you smoke pot you will go crazy" its freakin hlliarious.

So to end this very short rebuttal I only met help us get out of debt not debit. So thank you for correcting what i met. I would love to hear how you think it would not help and make it worse for which is what I assuming what your conclusion is going to be.

Marijuana been around for generations and it took the government to scare us out of using it because it would make us go crazy or do other drugs or lower our self esteem or do something to us but they don't know what. People drink, smoke, eat unhealthy so whats wrong with pot especially if it would help cut some of our losses and gain some potential income to help us out in the long run. Even if its a little bit it stlll helps .

Thank you and congratulations. I will better prepare myself next time when i have the time to gather sources or you.

P.S. whoo hoo the saints won the super bowl
I-am-a-panda

Con

I thank my opponent for his response and for this debate.

"The tax the government puts on them eventually goes to help with funding sources to the governments wants. So if Marijuana was legalized and put into packages like cigarettes. The tax on them could help get us out of debt."

--> While the taxation of Marijuana would no doubt bring in revenue for the government and help ease the deficit, it would be in no way able to match the thousands the U.S. deficit increases by each second. By personal estimation it takes approximately 5 seconds for the debt to go up by $100,000 [1]. It would be implausible for enough Marijuana to be sold to generate enough revenue to match this.

"On top of that the people they put behind bars for crimes related to marijuana would lower the amount of images in jail and that's another fee waked off the budget. I am under the assumption that if marijuana becomes legal if would create jobs for people unemployed which would lower the amount of money needed for welfare or what not."

--> Whilst I agree with you that it would create jobs, it would not be sufficient to alone match the growing deficit. And as for decreasing people in prison, current criminals would be "grandfathered" (i.e. they old laws would still apply to them) but the inflow of prisoners would initially drop. However, an increase in numbers from people who still sell drugs illegally and people who break regulations would go into prison. Although there would be less prisoners, to say all the current marijuana offenders will just disappear is false.

"the 1930-1940's 12million spent. 1940-1952 2billion spent. 1960-1970's 9 billion spent. the 1980-1990's 220 billion spent. Who knows what they are spending now on the war on pot. it was quit funny."

--> The following statement has no sources, and is therefore holds no weight in this debate.

My opponent has not shown how the legalisation of marijuana alone would counter the U.S. deficit

Thank You.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by grantman 6 years ago
grantman
I was in a since setting up all the reasons it should be legalized and from there explain how i think it would get us out of debt. but some day when i don't have a life and i have the time to do this i wil prepare this debate in a better fashion. I was doing this because i was board and wanted to give this a try i will but out because people take this thing WAY TO SERIOUSLY. lol u should see the homeless debate and you'll see what i mean
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I'll give the nod to Con because it was so difficult understanding what Pro was saying. The resolution was unclear, but Con reasonably interpreted it as meaning "because it would get us out of debt," which it wouldn't.

Consider for comparison the resolution, "Private ownership of land mines and flame throwers should be legalized to help get us out of debt." Statics should that there were no deaths last year due to private ownership of land mines or flame throwers last year, so clearly they are safer than tricycles (or whatever). Nah.

How about the deleterious of marijuana intoxication causing incoherent thinking? There is evidence for that.
Posted by grantman 7 years ago
grantman
English is my first language. Grass was the name of the documentary I was talking about. The movie is by woody Harrison. Panda I expected better out of ya. Very poor rebuttal. But it looks like people disagree with me. So be it. My main purpose was to prove that legalising pot would help get us out of debt. Maybe i should of cleared it up and said little by little. or state by state thats all i have to say. Best of luck to you panda
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
Grantman, is english your second language? I legitimately would like to know.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Dingo7 6 years ago
Dingo7
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by HiOedipus 6 years ago
HiOedipus
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by grantman 6 years ago
grantman
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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:52 
Vote Placed by belle 7 years ago
belle
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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:32 
Vote Placed by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
grantmanI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04