The Instigator
TheoEkman
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
frankfurter50
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/21/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 947 times Debate No: 114144
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

TheoEkman

Pro

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.
frankfurter50

Con

Do you support death and addiction? explain this to me a bit more. I'm intrigued. If you can prove this, you can prove anything.
Debate Round No. 1
TheoEkman

Pro

Hello!
-
Nobody would support anything like death and addictions. I believe that we should regulate the drug market in such a way so that the buyer is always aware of the danger of the drug in order to buy it. I don't think that people should have the right to drive or do potentially dangerous things while high. The reason for this is that by for example driving while high, then you are exposing other people of a risk which they have not agreed upon. Therefore its wrong.
-
I support the legalisation of drugs because of many reasons. The first reason is a moral perspective. If we can regulate what an individual do with his or her own body, we are then implying that the individual does not own his or her own body. If the individual would have a total ownership of his or her own body, then there would not be a problem. If I owned my body, then why would anyone have the right to prevent me from using my body the way I choose to?
-
Reason number two is that 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.
-
If we would make drugs legal, then I think that the drug addicts should be offered help with their problems, and I also think that the drug addicts would dare to seek help, since they have not done anything illegal. The other alternative is that we put them in prison because a victimless- crime. In prison there is a higher rate of drugs and criminality than there is out in the real world. In prison there are new contacts for the addicts so that they can buy more drugs, and take a new step into criminality. Those people need help, and nothing else.
-
You have your way to live your life, I have my way, but the correct and the only way, it does not exist. To say that the government get to decide what people can, and cannot do with their lives is terrifying.
frankfurter50

Con

I'm not sure if this is satire. I don't think it is.

To legalize toxic poisons is to support death and addiction. It does not matter if the buyer of a drug is aware of the dangers of the drug before buying it. People know that cigarettes kill them, but they still buy cigarettes anyway. Making something illegal is the best way to get rid of danger. I support marijuana legalization. I don't support meth, or LSD, or heroin. I don't think any sane person would support the legalization of those. If all drugs are made legal, the country will be left in a state of anarchy. It is wrong to drive while under the influence of drugs. It is wrong to take illegal drugs. It is wrong to sell illegal drugs.

What you are suggesting here, sir, is a form of legal suicide. I don't think suicide is a very good thing to legalize.

To ban drugs is not to regulate the human body. To ban drugs is to keep the human body safe. A person COULD potentially shoot themselves with a staple gun in the crotch, but it won't be very enjoyable. Drugs didn't exist in ancient times, sir. We invented them, and we must destroy them. They alter the mind, they change behavior, they are a highly lucrative and deadly business that must be kept under lock and key by law enforcement. There would be many problems if an individual had complete control over his or her body. Humans are irrational beings. Read "The Imp of the Perverse" By Edgar Allan Poe.

Your second reason is equally absurd. Cocaine did not become popular because marijuana was expensive. Cocaine got popular because it took people on acid trips. It had nothing to do with marijuana. Marijuana was not only high priced in the old days- it was illegal. It was illegal because the big tobacco industries wanted to avoid competition from marijuana. Marijuana is actually simply a relaxing, smokable plant with very few side effects. I see no reason why it shouldn't be legalized. It's easy to grow and it brings in a hefty profit. As for cocaine, though- well, it's insane. Watch "Reeefr Madness" for some stupid propaganda. In reason two, you're ignorant about how economic processes work.

The more money we put into the war on drugs, the more drugs lose. When we fight something, it declines. If we fight drugs enough, the prices will go up so high that nobody will buy them. That's what we're aiming for. And if drug dealers develop a new, cheaper, more powerful drug, then we simply eradicate that one as well. Lower prices would mean MORE drugs sold, not LESS. I think you think you've uncovered some sort of counter-intuitive loophole. You haven't, sir. Laws are exactly what they seem. Laws are for keeping people safe.

If we legalize heroin, most people won't use heroin. But some people will. And they'll die, or they won't be arrested for possession of heroin. Today, you can get arrested for simply owning heroin. In your insane world, police won't be able to arrest people who are holding a big bag of heroin. Sane people don't use heroin. But insane people do use heroin. laws are put in place to keep the insane people incheck. I'm not sure why we would need to legalize a drug, if most people wouldn't take that drug anyway unless they had a death wish. It seems very risky. We could make murder legal- Heck, we could do the whole Purge. But it would suck. Big time.

Nobody can have a good life while using drugs- aside from marijuana. Drugs are poison. Addictive, deadly poison. We must remove temptation to reduce temptation. 1 in 3 adults might try drugs during their lives. That does not mean they should have. Maybe they only took marijuana. That's fine. Heroin drives people insane. It kills people. It drives people over the edge.

Drug addicts should be offered help. But it does not help them to legalize the very thing which hurts them. They would not be more likely to seek help if we legalized drugs. They would go on a drug binge and then die.

There is a correct way to go about drugs. And that is to make them illegal.
Debate Round No. 2
TheoEkman

Pro

"To legalize toxic poisons is to support death and addiction"
-
Disagree, I want to legalise many things that I don't support. For example I want free speech to be legal, but that does not mean that I support all types of speeches. I support the legalisation of drugs because I think that people have the total ownership of themselves, but that does not mean that I want or support them doing drugs. I do not support drugs, only the legalisation.
-
"It is wrong to drive while under the influence of drugs"
As stated in my last argument, yes, its wrong to drive under the influence of drugs, because then you are exposing other people with a danger that they did not agree upon. But as long as the user is the only victim, I don't have a problem with it.
-
"Making something illegal is the best way to get rid of danger"
As stated in my last argument, the legalisation would not necessary mean more drug users. How many reading this would start using heroin tomorrow if we legalised it? The truth is that if you want to do drugs today, then you can get it from the black market.
-
"What you are suggesting here, is a form of legal suicide"
Call it what you want! I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his or her own way. If people have the ownership of their bodies, then we should not have the right to tell them how to live their lives. I think people have right to their own body.
-
"ban drugs is to keep the human body safe"
I think that we should have learned by now that if we sacrifice freedom for safety, we get neither of them. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can never make it drink", we can always set new laws, but all people will not follow all laws; forcing us to be violent against people who have done nothing to harm another man.
-
"Cocaine did not become popular because marijuana"
The fact that cocaine took people on acid trips, obviously had an impact on the popularity. But the main reason that it got as popular as it did, was because of the high marijuana price. Even if this would not have been true, my argument still stands. Because higher prices on drugs lead to a demand for a new and cheap drug. This is what is happening now, with internet drugs. We don't have time to qualify them as drugs before they have created new drugs.
-
"if drug dealers develop a new drug, then we simply eradicate that one as well"
The problem is that this process is way to slow. When a drug first start to sell, we have not classified it as a drug yet. By the time that a drug get illegal, it has already been sold to hundreds of people, and those people who bought it was not aware of the danger involved. By the time we make a drug illegal, the same process begin. Those internet drugs can kill in minutes. Because there were no real research going into the development of the drug. They simply made a drug as cheap as they could without extra research.
-
"Lower prices would mean MORE drugs"
Yes, lower price would mean more drugs. But the evolution of drugs would be over. Drugs such as internet drugs would not be developed since there would not be a demand for it. People would keep to less dangerous drugs such as marijuana.
-
Your last arguments had a really interesting base. What you are stating is that you want to live your life without drugs, therefore, nobody else should have the right to live their lives with drugs. This is a 1st amendment type issue. We don't have the 1st amendment so that we can talk about the weather. We have the 1st amendment so that we can say and believe very controversial things. So to say that; yes, I have my religious thoughts protected, but anyone who would like to follow something else should not have. Then we are not really protecting freedom. At the same time we need to be consistent, we need to protect liberty across the board, and not only at the bigger issues. So the same thing goes for drugs. You have your lifestyle without drugs protected, but anyone who would live their lives different does not. That's not freedom.
frankfurter50

Con

Why would you legalize something that you don't support? To legalize something that you don't support makes you a hypocrite. Free speech is guaranteed under the United States Constitution, but certain kind of speech, such as defamation or libel, are made illegal. Laws must be passed in moderation, sir. They cannot be made too loose or too tight. In the case of drugs, however, tight is good. By saying that you want to legalize drugs, you are saying that you want people to do drugs. There could be no other motive behind such an insane action. You clearly support the usage of drugs.

It's wrong to drive while under the influence. It's wrong to be under the influence. Every person who takes drugs is exposing others to danger. All drugs make people behave irrationally. Drugs are the seeds of murder and rape. You don't have a problem if the user is the only VICTIM? Are you wacky in the head? Why should there be any victims at all? Does anybody deserve stained teeth and black lungs? You're talking tripe.

The legislation would mean more drug users. many people repress the urge to use drugs. Many addicts would find getting drugs much easier if they were legalized. You talk about the black market as if it's easy to access. It's illegal to purchase anything from the black market, sir. It's not a super market. It's the BLACK market. Note the word BLACK. It is illegal to use the Black Market. Today, if a person goes onto the Black Market, and the police catch him trying to buy heroin, they can slap the cuffs on him. In your insane world, the police will be unable to arrest people trying to buy drugs.

I am not calling it what I want to call it. I am calling it what it is. Drugs kill people. Do you want people to go to Hell forever? Or, Christian theories aside, to have very horrible lives filled with suffering and confusion? Dr. Kevorkian would agree with you, but he's wrong. People own their bodies, and people should take care of their bodies. They shouldn't abuse their bodies with poisons. And laws are set in place to keep them from doing that.

The ability to take drugs is not freedom. It is a trap, and a very malicious trap at that. Safety is important. We can set new laws, and you're correct in assuming that not everybody will follow all those laws, but those laws do prevent people from disobeying them. laws are made to reduce crime. If we get rid of laws, there will be more crime. That is how the world operates. You can't seem to accept that. Drugs are bad. Laws are good. This is philosophy at a preschool level.

Cocaine takes people on acid trips. It has nothing to do with marijuana. The two are not related. Marijuana was badmouthed by the tobacco industry. That's all there is to it. Read up on your history. Cocaine didn't get popular because marijuana was highly priced. Marijuana was actually relatively cheap and easy to cultivate- and cocaine was very expensive, leading it to be highly desired. But the two are not related. Marijuana creates a pleasant sensation. Cocaine kills you. Higher prices on drugs are good. They should be expensive, so they're inaccessible to most people.

Drug dealers don't put research into how good a drug is. All drugs, aside from pot, are designed to kill and addict. Lower prices would mean more drugs sold. And internet drugs wouldn't disappear. They'd flourish. The evolution of drugs wouldn't be over. We'd develop an incredibly potent drug that would kill everybody.

I want to live my life without drugs, and nobody should live their lives with drugs, aside from marijuana. I'm OK with marijuana being legalized. It's fine. But every other drug, from tobacco to meth, has to be eradicated and stopped. I have freedom of speech, thus, I can challenge your misguided notion that drugs should be completely legal. The ability to take drugs is not freedom. You said you wanted your mind changed, but you're pretty stubborn. I think I'm going to send you another debate. Vote wisely, judges. I'm outta here.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by frankfurter50 3 years ago
frankfurter50
Because nobody cares.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
TheoEkman
Im not sure why nobody vote :D
Posted by Justin1984 3 years ago
Justin1984
Why doesn't anyone vote? Am i missing something?
Posted by frankfurter50 3 years ago
frankfurter50
That's sarcasm, I think.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
TheoEkman
Thank you OrangeTortoise!
Its good to see that im not alone with my thoughts!
Posted by OrangeTortoise 3 years ago
OrangeTortoise
Oh man. I completely agree with I think all of your debates. Taxation is theft (even though we need it), Prostitution should be legalised, all drugs should be legalised. Less money flowing to the black market.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
TheoEkman
I misunderstood the question, I'm not cooperating with anyone. And I'm not trying to assist anyone.
Posted by TheoEkman 3 years ago
TheoEkman
I think that all drugs should be legalised. But I also think that we should regulate the market in such a way that you have to understand the scientific risk of the drug in order to buy it.

Yes, I mean ALL drugs.
Posted by TKDB 3 years ago
TKDB
Hey TheoEkman:

Who are you maybe assisting with your "All drugs should be legalized" argument?

NORML?

Herb.com?

The Cannabist?

Maybe the weed users specifically?

Maybe the weed industry itself?

TheoEkman: Care to comment?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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