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

All drugs should be legalised, change my mind.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Duke1990 has forfeited round #2.
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: 800 times Debate No: 112882
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
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.


Legalising drugs is very ominous!
Here is a summary of why not to legalise all drugs:

*Productivity costs to the economy
*Negative social aspects
*Addiction leads to crime
*Legalising drugs will shift the deaths associated with gang/cartel/mafia warfare to drug overdoses
*Impact to family and individual wealth
*Impact to family and individual well being
*Health care costs will sky-rocket
*General tax payers will be impacted due to the shift of money being fueled into health care costs and in turn neglecting other areas of focus that have proved positive social impacts such as medical and science research, infrastructure
*Driving under the influence of drugs will increase; which will lead to increase fatalities on the road

As a society we need to focus on areas that will improve society, not hinder the progress and especially impose an unnecessary evil that will corrupt people. We need remember as humans we are vulnerable, and have moments of weakness that result in regrets.

Lets look at a comparison of American gun laws V's Australian and United Kingdom gun laws. America has profound negative implications with guns literally being passed around like air around society, just look at all the mass shootings. Compare that to Australia and United Kingdom, for example the last mass shooting (massacre) in Australia was in the mid-to late 90s (Port Arthur Massacre); since more regulated gun laws no such event has occurred. I guess my fundamental argument in this paragraph is that when something, that may cause or have negative implications in society, is readily available it will do so, and on a grand scale. And even people that are morally opposed to consuming drugs, will have moments of weakness and this could irreversible regret.

You might argue that legalising all drugs might be safer, because there would regulation and the chemical composition be in turn regulated, and hence deaths resulting from dud drugs could reduce; this might be accurate, but my above arguements would superseed that as mortality would increase due to utilising the substance even if it chemical composition was stable for a human to consume.
Debate Round No. 1


I do not want free health care, but I do want the people doing drugs to be offered psychological help. But free health care is another discussion.

Driving while on drugs should be illegal. Just as it is today. But all your arguments seem to be standing on one belief: 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. There is nowhere in between. Simple as that. My point is that there wont be a large amount of people who start doing drugs just because it will become legal, and that is what your arguments seem to be based upon.

1 in 3 adults have been doing illegal drugs at some point in their lives. I don't think that anybody would think that 1 in 3 adults have been suffering from all those negative aspects of drugs that you just mentioned. Which means that you are taking a bunch of exceptional and extremely rare cases, in order to prove that all cases of drugs are bad.

There is a really big and important difference of guns and drugs. If the rate of drug use goes up and down, there that wont be a big problem, since it is only hurting the drug users themselves (actually, a very small proportion of the drug users). But if the rate of gun violence goes up, we have got a really big problem at our hands. Guns are made to harm other people, while drugs are made either for medical reasons, or for an experience. A man has his own choice if he would like to do drugs or not, but no man has a choice if he will be shot by a gun or not.

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.

I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his or her own way.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 15 records.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
Intelligence is limited by abilities and options, chain a man to a wall and let him stay there with only limited amounts of crappy foods and nothing to do, and eventually throw a pack of cigarettes in there each day, i recken he will begin smoking
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
Im more than happy to bring it up to a debate ;)
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
Poor people dont have the freedom to kontrol it, cigarettes should be banned
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
I would want it to be legal no matter how dangerous it is. I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his own way.
Posted by bmdrocks21 3 years ago
Why is the level of danger associated with the drug irrelevant?
This debate has 2 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.