The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

de criminalize marijuana

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  
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/15/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 950 times Debate No: 18806
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Marijuana should be de-criminalized for a few reasons, There is not one case in history that recorded a death due to only cannabis use, not one! Compared to the hundreds of thousands that die due to tobacco and alcohol!


I accept. Thank you,Pro, for challenging me on this debate topic.
Debate Round No. 1


It has so many well uses for it, and most people who have never tried it don't understand how it truthfully is, It is not addicting one but, its proven that coffee is more addicting then it. I go weeks at a time without a hit, i take it as i please, i never get the feeling of needing it. But don't get me wrong i am compleatly against other HARD drugs like meth crack ect. But i have been smoking cannabis since i was 14 and I never got less then a B went to Rider and am now making 6 figures at 28. Witch brings me to another theory about pot smoking witch is the stepping stone theory, meaning if you try pot your bown to want to take the next step to the hard drugs, witch is something compleatly untrue, i never even seen some of these hard drugs before, and neither have any of my friends that also smoke, not once in my life have i ever wanted to try any hard drugs and in high school the pot smokers frowned apon the crack heads, we stayed away from them, 1 in every 100 pot smokers do other drugs (from the union).


I would like to thank Pro for posting.

There are some negatives to smoking marijuana regularly.

Physically, lung damage does occur over time after years of smoking. Some sites have said that marijuana is less toxic for your lungs than tobacco; others have said that it is more. There haven't been many tests done because the government restricts funding for research because it is Schedule I. I haven't heard of reports of lung cancer caused by marijuana, but lung damage is a risk. Brain scans of lifetime users show a 12% shrink in the hippocampus of the brain compared to non-users. However, it is also shown that abstinence will reverse the shrinkage without problems.

Psychologically, there are risks as well. Marijuana is addictive and many people who smoke experience psychological withdrawal when stopping after using for long periods of time (depression, anger, etc.). Many people who smoke marijuana over time report a loss of interest in things that were once important to them. Many potheads admit this. Also, smoking heavily for many years causes what pot smokers call "burnout". Many pot smokers are less attentive and less responsive to other people around them.

Are these deadly? No. But should a drug be legal simply because it is not?

Accidental deaths are also common to people that smoked pot.
Debate Round No. 2


The brain scans that were done were done in the 70's were done on monkeys who were strapped to a gas mask and pumped with 63 joints, no oxygen was passed through, they were losing brain cells not because of the chemicals but because of lac of oxygen, they were passing out. And yes lung damage may occur over the years but its only from breathing in the heated smoke, and is nothing compared to the damages caused by tobacco, and addiction is non exsistant, sure it might suck without it for a wile but look at the withdraws from tabacco and liq, its no where close to them. the reason so many people are in rehab because of it is because the process is out of this world, if your caught with it, you go to court and have two choices, jail, or rehab, the answer is very obvious. And what you described as a burnout is not right, a burnout is almost like a hang over, it lasts for maybe a half a day and your just tiered, making it seem like your un-attentive and un- caring. But there is no way it lasts you in the long run, look at all the very successful people who smoked since they were 10 and became something big, they didn't get there by chance.

And are you aware of hemp? Hemp is a all in one amazing cheap product that will nearly save our economy. Hemp can be grown anywhere, and has thousands of uses. It is the strongest rope, it can be easly turned into fuel, and can be made into paper, the first document of the deceleration of Independence was made on hemp paper, its just stupid to keep cannabis illleagle.

And cannabis, i do not consider a drug, its a herb.

And by people saying people do stupid stuff when their high on pot is completely true, but not to the existent of injury, when people are high on pot they are not on high speed chases or running around with guns like drunks or hard drugs do to you, when your high on pot, you just want to relax, people dont get angry when they are high and they dont get sad, they just relax and let it take its curse, its almost impossible to explain.

No one can ever give the country a straight answer on why it is illeagle, in the early 19th century it was illeagle because it was said that all the tribal people and African Americans smoked it making them violent, then during Vietnam it was made illeagle for the complete opposite reason, it was said to make people nicer and that our enemies will use it against us. I mean its proven to be non threatening to your life, there is little to no withdraw, thousands of things we can do with it other then getting high.

I dont have to get into the medical uses of it cause those are already in use and not one problem has occurred yet.

Im not a hippie, im a 26 year old collage graduate making 114,000 a year with a beautiful wife and 2 kids i love to death.............and i smoke pot.

I just dont see why we keep on pushing this law, we spend millions in law enforcement to stop a drug that has caused no problems to people but the law against it, in my opinion we just drop it and go after the real drugs, like crack PCP ect, and maybe start thinking what people are doing, keeping the two most toxic addicting substances (tobacco, liq) leagle, and the most effective, non threatning herb on the other side of the law. The only thing that makes scence is that it makes no scene at all.

And P.S. I typed this high


Zak9 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by mditty708 7 years ago
Im a VP for a granite co. in NJ called Innovative stone, its, im not spending 6 hours re reading my arguments, i type and dont re-read it, im not here to impress people im here to state my argument and thats it
Posted by Lordknukle 7 years ago
28 and making 6 figures with that kind of grammar? I don't think so.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 6 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Relatively weak arguments from both sides. However, the forfeit in the last round effectively made Con concede arguments. I wish this debate had revolved more around the de-criminalize part of the resolution then the marijuana part. The facts being argued in the debate didn't exactly seem relevant. How do either arrive at their respective conclusions from whether or not pot causes lung damage? Regardless, Pro wins on concession. Conduct also goes to Pro for forfeit.