The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

All drugs should be legalised, change my mind.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
NDECD1441 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 4/16/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 561 times Debate No: 112867
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)




I believe that all drugs should be legalised, whether it is dangerous or not, is irrelevant

I challenge anyone to change my mind.

The only downside I see with the legalisation of drugs is that there might be <1% of more drug addicts.


Very well then, I trust you won't forfeit? Good luck to you.
Debate Round No. 1


Hello NDECD1441! Wishing you the best of luck for this debate!

My main argument for legalizing drugs would be that the drug user is only harming him/her-self. But I think I'm going to have to argue more objectively on this one, since you obviously don't believe in that philosophy.

The legalisation of drugs would in my opinion stop the development of new, less expensive and potentially more dangerous drugs. Take cocaine for example. The main reason that cocaine got as popular as it did, was because of the high marijuana prices. If the marijuana price would have been lower, cocaine would have never been popular. That brings the question, why were the marijuana price so high? The answer to that question is that it were illegal. If marijuana would have been legal, the price would have been low thanks to competition. But since it were illegal, it got harder to sell, so the drug dealers could set a higher price. By then, the demand for a new, less expensive, and potentially more dangerous drug also went up.

So my point is, the more money we put into the war on drugs, the harder it get for the drug dealers, forcing the price to go up and forcing a faster development of new, cheap, and more powerful drugs. This is the reason for so called internet drugs today. If the price would be low, nobody would develop new drugs, because there is no demand for it.

People who are against the legalisation of drugs usually believe: If we legalise heroin, everybody is going to use heroin!
Well, how many people reading this would start using heroin if it were legal? I bet nobody would start using it just because it would be legal. Nobody think like this: oh I cant take care of myself, and I don't want to use drugs, so I need the governments laws to take care of me!
Nobody see the law as an obstacle for drugs, you either want to do drugs, or you don't. Simple as that.

I do however understand the risks involved with drugs, and I'm aware that some people commit crimes while high. But this is a really bad argument against the legalisation, because 1 out of 3 adults have tried drugs at some point in their lifetime. But far from 1 out of 3 adults have a drug problem. This means that most people are actually able to have a good life while doing drugs. This means that the people who use this argument is taking an exceptional and small case in order to prove that all cases are bad, which is an extremely bad way of proving a point.

My question for you is: If drugs are illegal because people are too stupid to be trusted to decide if they want to "destroy their lives" with drugs or not, why are the same people, through voting, qualified to make good decisions with regards to, war, economics, abortion, the death penalty, international trade, schools, immigration, liberties… and yes ironically, if people should be allowed to do drugs or not?


Disclaimer: This is the format used in competitive debating. Good luck to Pro!

Before I begin, I'd like to start off by firmly establishing my stance. Simply, side con believes that status quo, while not perfect, is eventually a better world through comparative to pro's world. Now, I will proceed to engage with the points that side pro has brought up.

Side Pro comes up and tells you two things. Firstly, that it is because of the high price that led to the evolution of drugs. Secondly, that people should be trusted to keep away from the drugs themselves.

However, side con firmly believes in the contrary. To address the first point, side con can come up and tell you any day, any time, any where, that the high price has had little to no impact on the motivation to the evolution of drugs. For one thing, while marijuana prices are quite high, there are multiple places where you can see people around the area smoking the drug. Yet, the high prices don't discourage them from buying marijuana leaves, no matter how harmful to their health these particular drugs are. Marijuana is just the starting line, by the way. Instead, it is simply because of basic human want to see a new version of a drug that keeps inspiring new development of drugs. Even if we legalize all drugs, there still will be a lot more development on such evil things, and it won't be discouraged.

Secondly, side con believes that while people have the right to choose, it shouldn't remain absolute. In fact, for such a big problem, I believe that people shouldn't even have a say in which drugs they want to use or not; as in multiple countries, there are drugs legalized, such as the Netherlands. Yet no matter how much trust they place on the people, it all has been betrayed, as on 2017 alone, 20,503 drug offences have been committed, and there were 14,000 high risk opioid users. As a government, with the safety of the people is at hand, the absoluteness to the right of choice will have to be restricted, yet, I am going to bite the bullet, by saying that I believe it is still a worthy trade-off to make for a better society.

This brings me to my substantial point. This is going to be short, as I'm running out of characters to type, but this will prove how drugs are very deadly to a lot. We have to take into account that there is a reason why the War on Drugs is actually happening. These substances risk the lives of just about every civilian out there, who, the moment they begin drinking or smoking, have a much higher chance of being addicted and dying of overdose once and for all. In fact, in West Virginia, 52 out of every 100 people have died due to drug overdose in 2016 alone, and in Florida, 4728 people have died for the same cause. This shows the utter threat drugs pose to humanity. It kills a lot.

Overall, drugs have brought a huge death toll on the people, and as a government, we need to stop it.
Debate Round No. 2


"the high price has had little to no impact on the motivation to the evolution of drugs"
Lets say that all drugs are legal. Then the price of all existing drugs would be relatively low thanks to competition. Since the price is low, and the demand for the existing drugs are high. Then why would companies spend money on developing new drugs, when there is no demand for new drugs? "the high prices don't discourage them from buying marijuana leaves" That is the problem! There are two reasons why the drug price is high when it is illegal. 1. It is illegal. 2. The demand is high. If the demand is high, there is always room for more competition by other drugs, especially when the new drugs are cheap, and has the double effect. You did not point out any facts or arguments here, you just said that im not telling the truth. Could you please explain?

"as on 2017 alone, 20,503 drug offences have been committed" I'm assuming that you mean in the Netherlands alone. 1 in 3 adults have tried an illegal drug once in their lifetime. Some would argue that there are even more who try drugs in countries that drugs are legal in. But it is at least 1 in 3 adults have tried drugs. Netherlands population is about 17 000 000 people. 17 000 000 / 3 = 5 666 666. So there are at least 5 and a half million people who have tried drugs in Netherlands. 20 503 / 5 500 000 = 0.0037, which means that about 0.4% of all the people who do drugs are commiting drug related crimes, and if it is like you say: that more people do drugs if they are legalized. Then that number would become even smaller. So by using this argument as a response to mine, you are taking an exceptional and extremely small scenario in order to make all scenarios illegal.

I do not see why you would believe that 52 out of 100 people in WV dies because of drug overdoses. According to THE SAME SITE that you used, these are the leading causes of deaths in WV 2016.

s://; alt="" width="602" height="337" />

s://; alt="" width="460" height="45" />

As you can see here, only 884 people died because of drug overdoses.

Check it for yourself:

But even if that "fact" would be true, then why is it that marijuana and other drugs are strictly illegal in WV?

s://; alt="" width="602" height="271" />

The answer to that question is that, just because something is legal, does not necessarily mean that more people is going to use it. What you are refering to is: "If we legalise heroin, everybody is going to use heroin!"

Well, how many people reading this would start using heroin if it were legal?

I dont think that drugs are good for anyone, but I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his or her own way.

If we make drugs legal, then I think that the drug addicts should be offered help with their problems, and I would also think that the drug addicts would actually dare to seek help. The other alternative is that we put them in prison, where there is a higher rate of drugs and criminality. We give them contacts into the black market by putting them in prison.

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
I might later, I cant spend much time writing atm :/
Posted by NDECD1441 3 years ago
Yeah. Sorry I couldn't complete the debate. You could re challenge me, but I'd rather a longer deadline and higher character limit. It'll serve better for the both of us.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
I did not see anything come up :/ must have been the site messing up again then :(
Posted by NDECD1441 3 years ago
Wait. I didn't post??? I was pretty sure I did...
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
s://; alt="" width="602" height="271" /> those were supposed to be pictures, the format worked until i posted it LOL. But I think you understand what were on the pictures, if not, here is the sites that I used:
Posted by NDECD1441 3 years ago
Good luck on the problems TheoEkman! As for GodsWarrior76, I believe I can speak for him that you're asking the wrong guy. I will be arguing on how the undue influence of drugs will inevitably take place, especially with drugs now open. I think when it is resolved, our debate should solve the problem :D
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
I cant post my argument for some reason, I will post it as soon as fix their issues. :D

GodsWarrior76 would you start doing heroin if it were legal?
Posted by NDECD1441 3 years ago
I apologize for the bad conclusion. The 3000 character limit was hard to sustain my entire plan.
Posted by NDECD1441 3 years ago
Relax GodsWarrior. I'll handle this (wink wink)
Posted by GodsWarrior76 3 years ago
TheoEkman is majorly retarded with this debate, 1%? You gotta be REALLY retarded. People kill themselves with it constantly, and if it were completely legal, OH MY GOD, it would be an epidemic, people would become addicted every where mindlessly unable to stop. You really should get a new argument, because, it's moronic.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.