Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

Recreational marijuana should be made legal in the United States.

I propose that the debate should start with the undeniable truth that the cannabis plant should be decriminalized in the U.S. due to its myriad of beneficial properties. For instance, the cannabis plant yields hemp, which is an environmentally friendly and more cost-effective alternative for producing paper, rope, and clothing. As long as it remains illegal, it is virtually impossible for anyone to produce hemp in the U.S. If legalized, hemp could not only help to reduce our environmental impact, but also save money. Scientific studies have confirmed that marijuana is less harmful than both tobacco and alcohol. So, why are the latter two legal while marijuana continues to be one of the most contentious political issues in the U.S.? No one seems to have a credible answer other than it is a drug and should remain illegal. However, this argument is baseless given that many other drugs are illegal yet are helping people, which marijuana could also do if it were legalized.

I personally have no problem with the legalization of marijuana, I accepted this debate just for fun. I am aware my opponent picked con despite arguing pro, I was aware when i accepted and knew I would be arguing con. Best of luck to my opponent. 1. Marijuana is a gateway drug. Many say that it's legalization will remove to title "gateway drug" because they will no longer need to go to illegal means to get the drug. However, since many will now be able to get the legal drug and become addicted to the euphoria it causes, they may then resort to illegal means to get hard drugs for a more intense euphoria, after all in their mind, they may not see the big difference between weed and a hard drug, like heroin. Sorry for short start as I did not have much time, I'll work to make it longer round 2

Why should marijuana be illegal? It isn't a nasty concoction of a drug; like meth. It is a plant that grows in the ground and does no harm to anybody. So many people do it anyway, so why not just legalize it and stop people from being taken away from their families and friends. Opinions please!

This is my first debate here and I think this will be an interesting topic. I have not seen it on this site. As Pro I will contend marijuana should indeed be legalized. Con will argue it should NOT be legalized.

I believe in freedom for all. If you really are afraid of getting addicted to marijuana from others second hand smoke (LOL) my advice is to avoid such places. Especially cool cities such as Vancouver and Denver. I don't think your medieval thinking would go over that well. One would think if we truly did live in a democratic society the majority would have a say on the subject and we both fully understand that the overwhelming majority can think of better ways the police and courts could use their tax money. The law truly is as laughable as the rule of thumb law that was one day actually in writing. Do you believe marijuana to be a gateway DRUG ? (Lol)

While it may be true that marijuana is less dangerous than cigarettes and alcohol, that does not make marijuana the no-risk factor drug. That just makes the United State's legalization of cigarettes and alcohol illogical. While there is no recorded death from marijuana overdose, that does not mean there is not a risk. A user may not die from the plant itself, but they could die from what else is in the drug. Drug dealers line their weed with all sorts of other things to make it seem like the user is buying more weed, some of them that may be lethal to the user. Sometimes the dealer lines it with something like cat litter, or sometimes it is line with a drug like crack cocaine [1]. It is known that as many as 15,000 deaths were caused by cocaine use [3]. Also, many marijuana plant growers grow the drug using plant hormones and steroids to "push" the plant to produce the most potent marijuana possible [1]. The logical argument to this information is, of course, that the legalization of marijuana would stop drug growers from having to grow it this way because it would be regulated like tobacco cigarettes and alcohol. This is not true. Why would drug growers want to stop making more money out of their marijuana by adding cat litter and crack to the drug? Why would people want to stop buying more potent drugs? All legalization would do is make it so the growers and users would not have to do it in hiding. Legalization would not stop the dangerous ways of growing and selling marijuana, it would increase it. You claim that marijuana does not damage the brain. It does. According to [2], "Some studies show that when people have smoked large amounts of marijuana for years, the drug takes its toll on mental function...Marijuana affects memory, judgment and perception...If you use marijuana a lot, you could start to lose interest in how you look and how you"re getting along at school or work." The choice to use marijuana despite its affects is all on the user, but kids and teens are pressured into using it all the time. If marijuana was legalized, kids would think it was okay, and they would be smoking it like cigarettes and binging on it like alcohol. If an adult wants to mess up his life, then fine, but a kid would not really know what the consequences could be if he started smoking weed. The illigalization of the drug at least warns kids that they should not smoke weed. Legalizing the drug would throw concern for child drug abuse to the wind. You claim that marijuana use is not linked to cancer. It is. According to [1], "Marijuana contains known toxins and cancer-inducing chemicals, which are stored in fat cells for long periods of time." "Scientific research relates marijuana use to damaged brain cells and respiratory systems, decreased hormone production in both sexes, acute memory loss, lowered immune systems and impaired motor skills. THC and marijuana smoke have been directly linked to miscarriage, in-utero fetal death, stillbirth and infant death just after birth, along with behavioral and biological abnormalities of offspring," [1]. You say that alcohol is more addictive than marijuana. This may be true, but that does not make marijuana non-addictive. According to [1], "Long-term marijuana use can lead to addiction in some people. That is, they cannot control their urges to seek out and use marijuana, even though it negatively affects their family relationships, school performance, and recreational activities." Marijuana users can also develop tolerance, according to the same source. This means the user need larger and larger amounts of marijuana to get the same desired effects as they used to get from smaller amounts in the past. Marijuana can, in fact, be an addictive drug. People have been known to be violent or use violent measures if it means getting their weed. The drug war IS costing taxpayers billions of dollars just to have weed smokers imprisoned. Legalizing marijuana would not help that problem! Many drug users would still end up in jail, not merely just for smoking weed, but for what they do because they are high on the drug. Legalizing marijuana would not solve that problem. Yes, people do have their rights. I suppose people do have the right to smoke pot if they so desire, but people also have the right to be safe as well. Someone who is high on marijuana and in need of more could and would do a lot to get it, and that could involve injuring an innocent victim, or worse. Parents also want their kids safe from pressure to do drugs and from having the availability of a drug like marijuana in the first place. The legalization of it would get rid of what little barriers we have and make it so much easier for someone to get a hold of it, and everyone would, because there would be no consequences. 1.http://www.nytimes.com... 2.http://uodos.uoregon.edu... 3.http://www.egoastra.com...

Thanks for letting me fulfill my position.Here is my stance in this debate."1) It's extremely addictive for some people: If you don't want to take my word for it, listen to Dr. Drew Pinsky who has been working with addicts for decades. It would be malpractice to say that cannabis isn't addictive. Anybody who's experienced it, actually been addicted to it, knows how profound that addiction is.... The difficult thing about marijuana addiction is some people, even though they're addicted can do fine with it for many many years before they start to have difficultly, but eventually the high starts wearing off, people start smoking a lot more to try to get that high back and that's when they descend into difficulties. ...I've been treating cannabis addiction for 20 years. When people are addicted to cannabis, cocaine and alcohol the drug they have the most difficult time giving up is the cannabis. It is extremely addictive...for some people. I think that's where people get confused. It's not very addictive for many people. It's a small subset of people with a genetic potential for addiction. But for them it is really tough. You only need talk to them, they'll tell you how tough it is. Additionally, that "small subset" Dr. Drew is talking about isn't so small in a big country like America. "Of the 7.3 million persons aged 12 or older classified with illicit drug dependence or abuse in 2012, 4.3 million persons had marijuana dependence or abuse." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the more legal and available marijuana becomes, the higher those numbers are going to go. 2) This experiment hasn't worked out so well for Amsterdam: Humans being what they are, just about any stupid idea we can come up with has already been tried somewhere else. Amsterdam is the most famous place across the world that has effectively legalized pot. It has even turned into a tourist destination for potheads. Legalizing weed has been a huge success there, right? Actually, not so much... Its citizens are now alarmed that their children are increasingly being exposed to it. Amsterdam today became the first city in the Netherlands to ban students from smoking marijuana at school. The city's mayor Eberhard van der Laan introduced the law after school chiefs complained about pupils turning up to classes high after rolling up outside the grounds. Marijuana is widely available in Holland as, although it is technically illegal, police can't prosecute people for possession of small amounts. But it has also had the unwanted side effect that Dutch children are frequently exposed to the drug in public areas. Additionally, contrary to the claims that legalizing it will reduce crime, in Amsterdam it’s been found that crime is now centering around the coffeehouses where marijuana is sold. …Certainly the outlook for coffee shops is bleak. Among the few policies that the three parties in the new coalition government agree on is the need to reduce their numbers. The governing agreement released last week laid out plans that will force them to become members-only clubs and shut down those shops located near schools. The coalition is also advancing the idea of prohibiting the sale of cannabis to non-Dutch residents, which amounts to a death knell for many coffee shops. ...The circumstances that led to the tolerance policies have changed in the past decade, as large-scale crime around coffee shops and the legal sex trade became more visible. In particular, the absence of legal means for coffee shops to obtain cannabis has highlighted their association with organized crime. But the open-minded instincts that helped foster the policies are also being questioned. And it is not just the far-right opposing coffee shops. The traditional parties of power on the center-right, the Christian Democrats and the Liberal VVD, have also moved against the policies they once promoted. That doesn't exactly sound like a success story, does it? 3) Marijuana is terrible for your mental health: Marijuana may even be WORSE than cigarettes. At least cigarettes don't peel points off of your IQ. A recent Northwestern University study found that marijuana users have abnormal brain structure and poor memory and that chronic marijuana abuse may lead to brain changes resembling schizophrenia. The study also reported that the younger the person starts using marijuana, the worse the effects become. In its own report arguing against marijuana legalization, the American Medical Association said: "Heavy cannabis use in adolescence causes persistent impairments in neurocognitive performance and IQ, and use is associated with increased rates of anxiety, mood and psychotic thought disorders." So, there's a good reason most habitual marijuana users come off as stupid. The drug is making them stupider, even when they're not high. You really want your kids on that? 4) Marijuana is terrible for your physical health: How bad is marijuana for you? It's even more toxic than cigarette smoke. Regular users are hit with devastating lung problems as much as 20 years earlier than smokers. Even small amounts of marijuana can cause temporary sterility and it has a terrible impact on the babies of women who smoke including "birth defects, mental abnormalities and increased risk of leukemia in children." If your standard is, "Well, it's better for you than Meth or Crack," that's true, but you're deluding yourself if you think pot is anything other than absolutely horrible for your health. 5) The drug decimates many people's lives: Movies portray potheads as harmless, fun-loving people who spend their time giggling and munching Cheetos, but they don't show these people when they're flunking out of school, losing their jobs, frustrated because they can't concentrate or losing the love of their lives because they just don't want to be with a pot smoking loser anymore. Even in the limited number of studies that are out there, the numbers are stark. A study of 129 college students found that, among those who smoked the drug at least twenty-seven of the thirty days before being surveyed, critical skills related to attention, memory and learning were seriously diminished. A study of postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana had 55% more accidents, 85% more injuries and a 75% increase in being absent from work. In Australia, a study found that cannabis intoxication was responsible for 4.3% of driver fatalities. ...Students who use marijuana have lower grades and are less likely to get into college than nonsmokers. They simply do not have the same abilities to remember and organize information compared to those who do not use these substances. It's bad enough that we already lose so many Americans to cigarettes, alcoholism, and drunken driving. Do we really want to endorse the loss of millions more potentially productive Americans via Marijuana? Do we move on from there to Crack, Heroin or Meth? Some people would say, “If they want to do it, great, then it's no business of ours.” But, you can also bet that those same people will be complaining about all the junkies and welfare cases that will be created by the policy they endorsed. So, ask yourself a few key questions. Is legalizing Marijuana going to make this a better country or a worse one? Would you want to live in a neighborhood filled with people who regularly smoke marijuana? Would you want your kids regularly smoking pot? Now is the time to think about it because although it's easy to thoughtlessly legalize a drug like marijuana, when things go predictably wrong down the road, it will be a lot harder to put the genie back in the bottle than people seem to think." [1]Sources:[1] https://calmusa.org...;[2] http://www.celebstoner.com...;(Just to cite a couple of the many examples that this article cited).

I will be arguing that marijuana, not necessarily in it's smokeable form should be legal for persons over a yet to be determined age(18-21) for medical and recreational use. Con will argue that it shouldn't be legalized for any age in any form, for any reason. Any source can be used until that source has been proven false or unreliable. Please respect your opponent. Debate can be informal. Con may begin with his or her argument in the first round or accept. Any further rules must be discussed and agreed upon in the comments section. Thank you and good luck.

The Bible is such an old book. It is not to be trusted. Only an utter fool would believe it. Are you a fool? I thought not. No man would refuse to smoke marijuana unless he was too rich to know that it's good for him. If marijuana is made illegal, it will cause a chain reaction leading to the destruction of all life as we know it! Don't you understand? If marijuana is made illegal, freedoms will be restricted. The children of America need their freedoms! Why would you rob such a thing from the poor, helpless children? But on the other hand, if you smoke marijuana every day, you will free the children from their burdens. You will be the most honored person in the world. But if you do not, you will surely die. I said that my opponent believes in a talking snake. Just one. But NO snake can talk, since I've never even seen one. God told me that he does double tests sometimes. Therefore, God only placed marijuana on earth to test the people who think they are being tested. The real test is to smoke it. Sort of like sex. Marijuana is a lot like sex: it's tons of fun and has great practical results. But let's stop talking about God. No one can even DEFINE God, for God's sake. Hitler didn't smoke marijuana. Hitler killed people. It is clear that all murderers also do not smoke marijuana and all people who do not smoke marijuana are murderers. Haven't you seen all those people on the news who murder people and don't smoke marijuana? Global warming stopped in 1998. This is God's way of saying that we should smoke marijuana. 100% of people who do not smoke marijuana eventually DIE. It is a terrible fate that they reach. Only through marijuana can we be liberated. Some drugs have negative consequences, but marijuana is different. Marijuana is great. Everyone knows it. There is no use denying it. If you deny it, that makes you an undead monkey. You don't want to be an undead monkey. Why does happiness exist? Marijuana! What makes the grass green? Marijuana! These are objective observations; my opponent's subjective ramblings should be ignored. Read the proof for Fermat's Last Theorem. It clearly proves that marijuana should be smoked regularly. My opponent must not only negate the resolution, but he must also disprove Fermat's Last Theorem in order for him to receive the vote. Notice that my opponent can be directly quoted to have said "smoke marijuana. " Even he advocates for my case. I ask my opponent: When you rejected all morality, were you smoking marijuana? I didn't think so. I remind the reader of the correlation between marijuana and utter bliss. My opponent has not made any arguments contrary to my position (actually he's helped my case). Since there is no contrary evidence, I am the obvious victor. My opponent advocates suffering and pain. I advocate happiness and glory. The choice is clear.

I argue that drug use in the US should be fully legalized, legalizing all forms of drugs, not simply marijuana. I have the burden of proof to convince voters that fully legalizing all drugs makes logical sense.

I would like to begin by defining a couple of terms. If my opponent disagrees with my definitions, then he/she can suggest and justify alternative definitions, however terminology should be agreed upon within the first half of the debate. I will not use dictionary definitions; let us just keep it simple. Possession means owning something. Use means smoking/inhaling/eating/vaporizing/etc. marijuan. Recreational marijuana means that adults ABOVE THE AGE OF 21 YEARS OLD are allowed to purchase up to SEVEN GRAMS of marijuana for any reason, with no medical conditions required. Legalized means that we remove the penalties from marijuana activities and that we regulate marijuana in dispensaries at which consumers of age can purchase it. The U. S. refers to all fifty states of the United States of America; the resolution seeks to essentially overturn the national ban on cannabis. The framework for this round should be net benefits. Unless my opponent is able to demonstrate that the costs of legalizing marijuana in the U. S. overwhelmingly outweigh the benefits, the Pro should win the round. Contention 1: Economic Benefits. Legalizing pot allows the United States to allow a wealth of economic benefits in the form of tax revenue and also in the form of liberating costly prisoners from incarceration. We have already seen examples of collecting revenue. According to the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), between January 2014 and October 2014, Colorado accrued 40 million dollars of tax revenue by legalizing marijuana and allowing 21+ citizens to purchase it. Suppose that we extrapolated legalization to the whole country. According to the Huffington Post, this would result in $8.7 billion per year in the form of state and federal taxes. Taxing any good or service allows the economy to grow, because it provides money that is uesd for other programs. In the case of marijuana legalization, these programs translate to education, health care, and drug addiction treatment, valuable impacts in our society. Furthermore, legalizing marijuana prevents costs that are associated with incarcerating individuals. According to the DPA, approximately 750 thousand citizens are arrested for an infraction of marijuana law each year. Furthermore, the cost of incarceration is $47,000 per prisoner per year. This translates to 7 to 10 billion dollars per year that are wasted on locking up stoners (rather than rapists or murderers). Clearly, not only does legalizing marijuana create money; keeping it illegal costs money. This 35 billion dollars could be used to reduce the national deficit, solve other crimes, or perhaps reduce taxes on American citizens. Contention 2: Legalizing marijuana reduces crime. Legalizing marijuana prevents police officers from wasting their time arresting harmless stoners, when they could be spending these efforts and resources fighting actually dangerous crimes, such as murder, theft, or rape. According to RollingStone Magazine, marijuana arrests are no longer real "police work"; law enforcement would rather spend their time tackling other crimes such as murder and rape. This argument is intuitive rather than logical; less time wasted on activity X (stopping pot smoke) leads to more time available for activity Y (stopping murder). LearnLiberty echoes this message: "legalizing marijuana frees up resources to solve other crimes". The impact is clear: a reduction in violent crimes that hurt American citizens, if the U. S. is smart enough to legalize pot. Contention 3: Legalizing marijuana reduces or eliminates racial discrimination in law enforcement. It should be clear to the layperson that most marijuana arrests are against racial minorities, particularly blacks. A black individual is no more likely to use pot than a white person but, in Washington D. C. , is over 8 times more likely to be arrested for it. This is what one could refer to as a Jim Crowe system; blacks suffer from mass incarceration much more than whites do, but they do not commit any more wrongdoings than whites. In order to provide for an American system of equality of opportunity and justice without regard to skin color, marijuana should be legalized. This will prevent irrationally suspicious police officers from locking up "dangerous blacks" (who, in truth, are not the least bit dangerous; they are just minding their own business); this racist enforcement is unethical, discriminatory, and clearly non-beneficial. Contention 4: Regulated marijuana is healthier marijuana. When alcohol was prohibited (i. e. before the 1920's), this led to an extensive black market whereby Americans still found ways to produce, purchase, and enjoy alcoholic beverages such as rum and beer. The same phenomenon occurs with marijuana. Even if marijuana is perceived to be dangerous, keeping it illegal does not deter its use. In fact, the criminal nature of cannabis provides a compelling reason for drug cartels to enter the country and sell cannabis, with no regard to whether the weed is tainted with dangerous chemicals like PCP. Since the illegality of marijuana fails to have any deterrent effect, legalizing pot will allow the government to closely control and regulate it. This allows for high-quality marijuana, meaning that consumers will enjoy marijuana that has no dangerous chemicals in it and that achieves standards of safety and health. This makes it a safer option. The influx of drug cartels is associated with the trade of weapons and also with violence, coercion, and sometimes murder. It is easier for a teenager to obtain a joint than it is for him to obtain a can of beer. Since Americans smoke pot regardless of whether or not it is legal, we should legalize it so that citizens purchase it from trusted, regulated dispensaries rather than untrustworthy, sketchy black-market dealers. Contention 5: Americans have freedom of choice. An American citizen should be able to do whatever she want, so long as her actions do not infringe upon the rights of others. Even if skeptics were successfully able to argue that smoking pot is harmful (which I would disagree with), Americans can choose to engage in harmful activities, as long as the others in society do not feel the effects of these choices. People are allowed to eat candy, drink beer, watch TV all day, and smoke cigarettes. Why should we limit the behavior of an individual simply due to archaic notions without any substantial evidence? Marijuana is used for a wide variety of medicinal and leisure purposes, and its effects have been described as uplifting, stress-relieving, and relaxing. To keep marijuana illegal is at variance with the pursuit of happiness that Thomas Jefferson had in mind when America was established as an independent nation. If individuals want to smoke pot, they should be able to do so, particularly in the privacy of their own homes. For many citizens, occasional marijuana use improves the quality of their lives and has medicinal benefits. Some who need it for medical use are too impoverished to afford to obtain a medical recommendation from their doctors, making their medicinal options severely limited. Keeping marijuana illegal is an invasion of privacy. In short, to legalize pot is to provide Americans with the freedoms of choice and discretion and the liberty that they deserve. I have posted evidence below that substantiates my claim. In short, the legalization of marijuana leads to benefits that address the economy, other crimes, racism, national safety, and the freedom of choice. These are all significant benefits that contribute to my proposed framework of "net benefits". A reason why keeping marijuana illegal is disadvantageous is equivalent to a reason why making marijuana legal is advantageous. Too many dollars are wasted in prohibition. Too many lives are locked up in prohibition. To many blacks and Hispanics are unfairly arrested in prohibition. Too many drug cartels enter the U. S. in prohibition. Finally, too many freedoms and basic liberties are violated in prohibition. For these reasons, the possession, use, and sale of recreational marijuana should be legalized in the U. S. Please vote Pro. I await Con's contentions. . https://www.drugpolicy.org... . http://www.huffingtonpost.com... . http://www.drugpolicy.org... . http://www.rawstory.com... . http://www.rollingstone.com... . http://www.learnliberty.org... . https://www.washingtonpost.com... . http://www.collegiatetimes.com...


Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

Recreational marijuana should be legalized in the United States. The enforcement of marijuana laws is estimated to cost the U.S. approximately $7.7 billion annually (Edwards, 2012). Compared to substances like tobacco, which offers no health benefits and is highly addictive, and alcohol, which can lead to physical dependence, marijuana is relatively less harmful. Moreover, legalizing and taxing marijuana similarly to alcohol and tobacco could generate approximately $6 billion in tax revenue each year. Marijuana has demonstrated efficacy in treating various medical conditions, and legalization would make it more accessible and affordable for medical use. An additional advantage is that it would take the product out of the hands of smugglers and drug dealers.

I'm for Marijuana Legalization so I will take the side of Pro, I think Marijuana being a drug is a terrible excuse, Caffeine is a drug, so is Tylenol, Ibuprofen, Alcohol, and Aspirin. In addition, "Well it might help if you have cancer. But only for a little." is incorrect grammar, because these aren't 2 sentences.

I just want to say that marijuana, while proven to have some negative side effects, are nothing compared to another recreational drug, alcohol. The side effects of marijuana are often temporary, and can be reduced to none when the drug is no longer in the users system. Marijuana as a medicine is often much safer than the legal counterparts, prescription drugs. Side effects from prescription drugs often include death, organ failure, etc.

NOTICE: This debate is apart of the Revive DDO Debate Competition. RESOLUTION: Marijuana Should Not Be Legalized For Use As Medicine or for Medical Purposes.

My Argument On Healthcare is Void?If drugs are legalised for recreational use they would also be available for medical experiments (in the same way alcohol is) therefore my argument stands.Drugs and ViolenceWhen Alcohol was legalised in the US violence went down [1]. In fact a large bump in the murder rate can be linked to the prohibition of alcohol in the US. During this time gangs took over the alcohol trade and this increased violence. When alcohol became illegal violence went up and when alcohol became legal violence dropped.This same parallel works for drugs. When drugs are illegal crime goes up because the drug market is taken over by violent criminal gangs.EconomyWhat if we compare the unemployment rate of the US as a whole with the Netherlands? Remembering that the Netherlands has far more Libertarian drug laws than united states. The Netherlands has an unemployment rate of 6.6%, its neighboring country Belgium which has much more authoritarian drug laws has an unemployment rate of 8.5% [2].Human NatureI showed that there were working anarchist communities in the north of Spain before and during the Spanish civil war [3].AddictionIt is considered impossible to overdose on marijuana [4] I can find no record of anyone who has died of marijuana.(Marijuana is illegal in Scotland) I took a survey of 20 people under the age of 16 living in Scotland and this is the result.65% Had been offered alcohol over the last six months.80% Had been offered class B drugs over the last six months.65% Had been offered class A drugs over the last six months.Furthermore remember that the total cost of alcohol in medical bills every year is £6 billion [4], vastly more than marijuana.[1] http://madeinamericathebook.files.wordpress.com...[2] https://www.google.co.uk...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

Hello all, I will be arguing for the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in the United States (to at least a level equivalent to that of alcohol's). I will begin by presenting all my points and their subset points for legalization. I respectfully request for my opponent to refute them, then I will challenge their arguments. This is simply to establish a sense of organization, please and thank you. Also feel free to add any points you may have or to not address any of mine that you choose (if you don't however, I will assume you either acknowledge/agree with my point or cannot refute it). I do not wish to focus on other drugs besides cannabis although I intend to mention them for argumentative purposes if necessary. If you do not understand anything I say, simply ask and I will clarify, no need to be rude.My Points1.There will be little to no negative effects to the country/society from marijuana's legalization.a) Marijuana is not addictive.b) It is physically impossible to overdose on marijuanac) Marijuana's supposed "negative" effects, whether long term or short, are negligible, and many of which cannot credibly be declared true.d) The logic of the gateway theory is fundamentally flawed and therefore it cannot be truee) Marijuana's intoxicating effects are not harmful to the users or others within itself (i.e. calmness, changes to mood or perception), and therefore responsibility is placed on the user (although it would be anyway).f) Youth's access to marijuana will not be increased by legalization but will in fact be decreasedg) Assuming it is true that marijuana's psychoactive potency has increased since the 1900's, it is an irrelevant fact seeing as how the negative effects remain unchanged.2. There will be a plethora of positive effects resulting from marijuana's legalization.a) The revenue saved and made from marijuana's legalization will be substantial and much needed to the countryb)The medical benefits (known and to be known) of marijuana would benefit many of its citizens, saving lives and creating a greater quality of life for manyc) Legalization will allow regulation of cannabis and therefore a greater degree of damage control. (i.e. preventing child access, reducing drugged driving)d) Legalization will improve society by ending prosecution and punishment of responsible, contributing citizens simply for committing the victimless crime of consuming cannabis for medical or recreational purposes.e) Gang violence and crime revolving around marijuana will be greatly decreased.f) Legalization's resulting industry would create jobs and generally benefit the national economy.g) Marijuana education would be healthy for both youth and adults (because now the only education is lies unless you dig deeper).3.Marijuana Prohibition altogether is a colossal failure.a)The whole purpose of cannabis prohibition is to prevent use nationwide, yet, cannabis use is still very prevalent.b)Because of point a, the adverse societal effects of marijuana (however minuscule) are in effect despite it's prohibition, ergo prohibition is purposeless.c)marijuana prohibition is exactly the same as the 20's alcohol prohibition save for the failure to end it.4. It is not the governments place to tell us how to live, but to protect the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for the nation.a) Proof of the government's failure to do this is how a constitutional amendment was needed to sign alcohol prohibition into law (and is now being used to prohibit marijuana). This means that the views/values this nation was built on differ from those that allow/support prohibition.

Weed at this point is being used a lot. All attempts by the government to stop people smoking weed has only made things worse. We should legalise it so we can regulate it, this way crime families don't make money off of it and the government can make sure it's safe to use.

I accept. With a normative resolution, we obviously have a shared burden of proof. RebuttalsPro says, "pot can cause problems such as mental health issues." Pro provides zero evidence for this claim, and fails to explain why, even if this were the case, states shouldn't legalize pot. Pro says, "they've done studies on this. this just causes disability and welfare spending to increase a lot more." If they have done studies on this subject, why hasn't Pro provided any? She is doing nothing more than making baseless assertions, and fails to connect her points to why states shouldn't legalize pot. Pro says, "most states should be monitoring colorado and washington to see how much the bad effects arise in those states." Note that she does nothing more than assume that there will be negative effects in Washington and Colorado, but provides no evidence that there is or will be. Monitoring these states is not a bad idea; it would allow states to effectively come to a consensus on the proper implementation of policy and what regulations would be effective at curbing any potential negative impact. But that is far different than maintaining current restrictive laws prohibiting pot. My Case C1) Bodily Autonomy Via Murray Rothbard: "The right to self-ownership asserts the absolute right of each man, by virtue of his (or her) being a human being, to “own” his or her own body; that is, to control that body free of coercive interference. Since each individual must think, learn, value, and choose his or her ends and means in order to survive and flourish, the right to self-ownership gives man the right to perform these vital activities without being hampered and restricted by coercive molestation" [1].This principle, which asserts a natural right to dominion over our own bodies, is important for several reasons. First, if we rightfully own ourselves, meaning that we are free from the coercion which would result from someone else owning or exercising constraint on us, we have the liberty to choose what goes into our bodies. Second, it treats people as fundamentally, intrinsicly valuable individuals capable of deciding for themselves whether it is best to engage in potentially harmful activites, such as using marijuana. Therefore, the government has no business in prohibiting substances in spite of whether or not it deems them to be dangerous.C2) Black Market The core problem with Pro's proposal, and the primary reason that you should vote negative, is that it only deals with legality. Keeping pot illegal has had much the same effect that illegalizing alcohol did: it drives people to black markets. It doesn't erase the demand for these substances, so necessarily people are going to look for other, more dangerous ways to sell and obtain pot, but it's even more dangerous in this way because the government isn't able to regulate it and prevent whoever sells it from spiking it with more dangerous drugs. C3) Victimless Crime Pro's proposal is, at its core, fundamentally unjust because it seeks to place people in jail for a victimless crime. Smoking marijuana does not in any way harm another person or impinge on their freedom. The government cannot and should not seek to protect people from themselves, as this would be a blatant disregard for the self-ownership principle. C4) Medicinal Value Pro's proposal suggests that states should not at all legalize pot, which fails to account for the fact that pot has medicinal value, particularly for cancer patients or people with severe pain. "Modern research suggests that cannabis is a valuable aid in the treatment of a wide range of clinical applications. These include pain relief -- particularly of a neuropathic pain (pain for nerve damage) -- nausea, spasticity, glaucoma, and movement disorders. Marijuana is also a powerful appetitte stimulant, specifically for patients suffering from HIV, the AIDS wasting syndrome, or dementia. Emerging research suggests that marijuana's medicinal properties may protect the body against some types of malignant tumors and are neuroprotective. Currently, more than 60 U.S. and international health organizations support granting patients immediate legal access to medicinal marijuana under a physician's supervision. [2]." C5) Economic Value of Legalization Dr. Miron from Harvard, in his paper entitled "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition," found the following [3]: -Replacing prohibition of pot with regulation would save a total of $7.7 billion on enforcement costs, $2.4 of which at the federal level and $5.3 at the state and local level. -It would generate a significant amount of revenue -- $2.4 billion if taxed like a regular consumer good, or $6.2 billion if it were taxed like alcohol or tobacco. Sources [1] http://utahliberty.org...;[2] http://norml.org...;[3] http://www.in.gov...;

Marijuana should NOT be legalized due to it's effects although it helps relax you it is also bad for you like for instance it makes your skin sensitive to cold and heat. It also makes your mouth dry which makes you drink more water, juice, soda etc. which can cause you to over hydrate. Back to you pro

Ok, this'll be interesting. I would like to approach this from a different angle than usual, and will first predict the future; The instigator will speak of how there are no negative effects and how it is less harmful than alcohol or cigarettes. Now, I am aware that cannabis does not kill brain cells, but it does produce a similar effect. Only during the constant use of weed does the effect of slow thinking arrive. Along with the argument that cannabis is not addictive, it could be said that it should be legalized. However, this is the inverse. This is in fact, an argument as to why cigarettes and alcohol should be banned, and the reasons why they have not been is that A; The corporations in charge have influence over the government and would lobby against the ban. B; The users of these products would also protest against the ban, and they outnumber weed users. Now, just because other addictives are already present does not mean any drug can enter. You have proposed an argument as to why other drugs should be banned, but they are already far too widespread to be banned completely (source, the prohibition years) and this does not justify legalizing weed. Now on the topic of addictiveness, it is true that weed is less addictive than alcohol. (not sure how they tested that) However, this is a problem in itself. Since no overdose can occur and it is not addictive, weed users will see no reason to have regulations on weed as there are on alcohol and cigarettes. Their argument will be that since since there is no negative effect, they do not have to limit weed use. It can take weeks to remove cannabis from the system (source www.drugs.ie/) and so if one was even to have some on a Friday or Saturday night, the effects would harm their productivity at work or school. (I have a friend who failed his end of year exams, which could be put down to a mixture of his cannabis use and his lack of study (which is also due to his cannabis use) But any personal stories I give can be ignored by you who will produce someone you know who retains intelligence post weed use. So I will close this speech now. I await your response, Duncan.

There are many arguments for both sides, let's hope we have an interesting and engaging debate. I'll begin with a bit of topic analysis: The resolution is as follows "All drugs should be legalized. " This means we're not only debating the legalization of Marijuana or Shrooms, but also the legalization of hard drugs that cause real psychological, physiological, and neurological damage, like Heroin and Crack Cocaine. Let's go through his arguments, point by point. "1. They can be taxed, more income that people would be happy to pay. " What makes you think that there wouldn't be a black market for drugs, even if they were legalized? There is a very lucrative black market for guns, it wouldn't be any different for drugs. Furthermore, what you're in essence saying is that it is good for the government to make money off of depraved and deranged addicts who will do anything for another fix. "2. Many of them are harmless in the short term. " Sure, but we're debating ALL drugs, not SOME drugs or MANY drugs. Heroin is devastating from the first time it is injected or inhaled, same goes for Cocaine, Crack, and LSD. Furthermore, if the drugs are laced with other substances we can't even guarantee that an inhalation of a relatively harmless drug like Marijuana will be "harmless. " "3. We've wasted more money on the war on drugs than we would have simply TREATING addicts and ignoring casual users. " I agree with you, but this is not an argument for legalization. It is an argument that advocates for a new approach to drug crime legislation, an approach that would focus on rehabilation over retribution. "4. Most of these drugs are only psychologically addictive (Weed, Shrooms, etc) and are no more dangerous than chocolate. " Psychological addictions can be just as devastating as physical ones, first of all, and patterns of abuse can occur very easily. Secondly, while "most" might only be psychologically addictive, many others are physically addictive, and these ones are the worst ones. In a debate over the legalization of all drugs, there is no way that this is an argument for Pro. "5. There is actually little conclusive evidence supporting many of the claims made by anti-drug persons. My own father claimed marijuana causes testicular cancer (when most research has actually shown is cures cancer, or prevents it)" What? Do you have any evidence that the claims made by anti-drug advocates are false? Do you have any evidence that shows that "most research has actually shown that [marijuana] cures cancer, or prevents it"? This is a ludicrous argument, baseless at best. "6. By taking the illegality away we would destroy the underground drug markets, all of the drug related deaths around the world would CEASE to exist because drug cartels no longer have power since clean industrial production would be created. " This is false, as I demonstrated earlier when I cited the black market centered around arms smuggling. Even if drugs were legalized there would still be an underground market for them, perhaps for cheaper prices or for a way to get around government restriction. In fact, if we gave more power to "clean industrial production" you can guarantee the drugs might get even more dangerous, packed with nicotine like cigarettes are. Marijuana would become physically addictive! As can be seen, each argument my opponent gives can be neatly rebutted with an obvious and clear counter-argument. My opponent goes on to say that since we can do things like buy cigarettes and vote at 18, we should be able to get addicted to heroin and ruin our lives at 18, too. Obviously his position endorses irresponsibility and societal unrest. For these reasons I urge a Con vote.


Question: Should the Use of Marijuana for Recreation be Legalized?

Marijuana should be decriminalized for both medicinal and recreational purposes.
Greetings, and thank you to my opponent for agreeing to debate this significant topic. I will start by presenting my argument. Cultivating, possessing, and using marijuana for recreational purposes (while medicinal marijuana should remain legal) should be decriminalized, but the penalties for these offenses should be drastically reduced. This is a much more practical policy than total legalization. I want to clarify that I concur with many of the arguments my opponent is likely to present. I agree that marijuana is a proven effective pain treatment, that THC has not been shown to have a direct adverse effect on the human body, and that the United States' drug policy is ineffective and has made no progress towards its goals. If my opponent presents any other conventional arguments against the illegality of marijuana, I will probably agree with them. However, I encourage my opponent to present them, as we are likely to have a similar stance on 90% of the issues concerning marijuana. I will now outline how marijuana laws should be changed and why full legalization is not recommended. First, the so-called "War on Drugs" has been proven ineffective by both marijuana advocacy groups and neutral government research. Instead, fines and other non-criminal penalties should be implemented to regulate and discourage recreational marijuana use. Why should marijuana not be fully legalized? Here are several reasons:

1. THC itself is not harmful, but smoking marijuana has negative health effects. If marijuana were legalized, marijuana cigarettes would be sold in stores, leading to increased consumption. Studies have found that while joints do not directly cause lung cancer or emphysema, they do have negative effects on the lungs and brain.

2. THC is an intoxicant, and anecdotal arguments that marijuana use does not affect driving ability are flawed. Drunk driving is responsible for many car accidents in the United States, and legalizing marijuana would not help curb "high driving." Instead, methods for testing suspected drivers under the influence of marijuana should be developed and implemented by police departments, with laws changed to punish "high driving" like drunk driving.

3. Legalizing marijuana would lead to mass production and large companies dominating the market. Tobacco companies have powerful lobbyists that make it difficult to change laws concerning distribution and marketing. It took years to legally force tobacco companies to display warnings on their packets and change advertising methods. There is no reason to assume that marijuana companies would enter the market with the public's best interests in mind. The dangerous pesticides and chemical additives in tobacco cigarettes are currently un

To start off I have never once smoked pot in my life. So I'm not some stoner complaining. I support the legalization of marajuana because the prohibition of marajuana has failed miserably. Actually, the war on drugs has inadvertently caused more human suffering then it has prevented. But I'm not saying that if people are gonna do something regardless of laws that we should legalize everything. I think that marajuana is not as harmful as we have been led to believe and that it can actually be a great benefit to society.

In response to the fact that you say a drug, such as marijuana, can be very harmful, I completely agree with you. I, myself, would never use these substances, but the thing is, it is the choice of the people to actually use these substances. The ones that do use the substances would provide the government with money, which we need desperately in a time of economic crisis. Additionally, I think that we also need to increase drug education in schools. If all drugs are legal, we need more education so the kids can make more decisions for themselves. There is also a medical aspect to this debate. The legalization of marijuana has cured thousands of people of cancer, and making it illegal would prevent these people from getting the proper medical treatment. Harder drugs like cocaine and heroin also serve as a great way to relieve pain, but they are slightly more addicting. Where cocaine is legal, in countries like Canada, dentists often put cocaine on their patient's gums to create a numbing sensation, easing the process of surgery for those who may be allergic to other numbing agents. Heroin also serves as a great painkiller for those who have gone through painful surgery or something of that nature. I know that abuse is a problem, but that is because doctors and drug companies try to make us buy more drugs to get us addicted and buy more. This can easily be fixed by banning all pharmacies and making them government owned. Finally, there are also hundreds of drugs that get people in trouble, but are actually not even bad for you. For example, ecstasy makes you see hallucinations. It's not even addicting, yet people are getting their lives ruined for only doing having a little bit and end up having to serve life in prison. The economy would see a great boost if all drugs were legal. Those who are addicted would give a lot of money to the government, reducing our taxes and making our country #1 in the world again.

The drug should not be legalized because if it is, then other drugs like herion and cocaine might be made legal as well. While it is used to treat diseases like cancer and other medical problems, which I have no problems with, if it was legalized, then dealers would be free to sell it on the streets to anyone they wanted. Crime would go up because as more of it sells, gangs would want to enlarge their territories, thus putting people who live in the areas in the middle of a possible gang war, and cause innocent people to be seriously hurt or killed. Drugs like marijuana are harmful to young children as it messes with their brain, which is still in important developing processes, if legalized then it increases the danger marijuana poses to them. Any drug has a risk of overdose no matter what it is, cocaine and herion are placed in the same category as marijuana, and you can over dose on the two, every drug has the possibility of over dosing.

Being that its illegal is appealing to people looking for a rush just from doing this. Also legalizing it will take plenty of drug dealers off of the street. Once these dealers are off the street they can finally be productive citizens. Also less crime would take place from this and there will be less people in jail for petty marijuana possession. Overall legalizing marijuana would benefit our country as a whole. Less money spent by drug task force, more money will be generated through taxation. Also there will be more people off the street selling drugs and they could contribute to society and be productive citizens.

NOTICE: This debate is apart of the Revive DDO Debate Competition. RESOLUTION: Marijuana Should Not Be Legalized For Use As Medicine or for Medical Purposes.

Topic: The legalization of Marijuana in the United States would a strong economy. 1. The distribution/use of alcohol is FAR more dangerous than the distribution/use of Marijuana. In 2005 alone, Border Patrol Agents encountered 773 attacks from smugglers trying to breach the U. S. border. In 2008 that number rose t 1,097, over 41%. Within the United States violence is encountered throughout all 50 states dealing with the distribution of Marijuana (I will be focusing on New York due to the amount of time it would take to collect all the information from each state). Marijuana distributors, particularly Jamaican posses, engage in violent crimes to protect their turf. Law enforcement agencies in Rochester, Buffalo, and Syracuse have reported an increase in drug-related violence resulting from an influx of Jamaican criminals who are challenging drug distribution areas long controlled by local marijuana distributors. Cannabis cultivation occasionally is associated with violent crime in New York. Typically, growers cultivate cannabis outdoors with booby traps situated among and around the plants. Reports indicate that traps closer to the cultivation site are more dangerous and sophisticated and target those who might steal the cannabis. Last time I checked, Anheuser Bush hasn't taken any shots at Marlboro. . http://www.fas.org... figure 11. . http://www.justice.gov... 2. The alcohol industries and tobacco industries have both flourished in any economy, why wouldn't the Marijuana industry flourish? Dutch sales of cannabis alone totaled 1.2 billion euros ($1.86 billion) in 2001, according to the most recent figures available from the nation's statistics bureau. While in 2003 annual alcohol sales were $115.9 billion and tobacco sales were $333.4 million in 2001. I'm no mathematician but a combined sales of $449.3 billion compared to $1.86 billion is just a little bit higher, in fact its over 242% more in sales. Considering we've spent $1.05 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to date, $1.86 billion isn't going to exactly make or break us as a nation. . http://www.dutchamsterdam.nl... . http://www.libraryindex.com... 3. Marijuana is already being distributed all over the United States, why not use it to help the economy? Simply because it is being distributed illegally, how many drug dealers do you think are gonna pay there taxes for there marijuana sales. Excuse me kid, that will be $10.00 for the dime bag and oh, .70 cents for sales tax, have a nice day! Yea not happening sorry. 4. There are an average of 0 Marijuana related deaths in the United States every year, however, there are 435,000 tobacco related deaths each year plus and additional 85,000 alcohol related deaths each year. This is 520,000 more deaths, on average, a year than deaths resulting from the use of Marijuana. Gang violence related to the distribution of marijuana as I stated in #1. 5. Not everybody would have to use Marijuana or buy Marijuana related products for the industry to flourish. The tobacco and alcohol industries flourish, and neither can boast 100% of American's behind them. Hell McDonald's annual sales in 2008 was $28 billion. As stated in #2, sales cant even begin to touch Alcohol or Tobacco alone, let alone added together. Hell McDonald's annual sales in 2008 was $28 billion. 6. The Marijuana industry would employ at least 200,000 Americans. I know this because we have already seen this trend in the tobacco industry. (. http://www.corpwatch.org......) Can't say this is exactly a factual assertion considering it is speculation based upon the Tobacco industry. As far as my standing on this, to say that there will be 200 Americans employed will be just as good as your "factual assertion" due to the fact that it is only speculation. All and all as you can tell through actual facts and numbers Marijuana sales taken from a country where it is actually legal and the sales are recorded, this would not "strongly" promote our economy or promote it anymore than Mcdonald's does. The legalization of Marijuana in the United States will have no strong or near strong promotion in our economy. Till next time, this is your Con argument host saying, thanks for playing, "Who Wants to Challenge Facts Against Speculation! "

Of course there's risk with weed as with any other drug. This however does not justify the Government's morality being shoved down in law.The distribution of weed and how it is dangerously used is none of the Government's business. People choose their own fates and if they want to use weed regardless of the risks, such as the use of alcohol and cigarettes, than they should use it.The Government can try to stop abuse through education and therapy, but prohibition invades civil liberties. Prohibition never successfully stops drug abusers from abusing drugs. So all prohibition does is waste billions of dollars to jail weed smokers instead of using that money for something useful. Marijuana, with all it's risks, is not nearly as harmful as cigarettes, which is basically poison in a stick, or alcohol. Kids and teens already use Marijuana. Teens especially. Weed runs rampant in high school and teenagers are already pressured to smoke weed. Legalization would change absolutely nothing. The only thing legalization would probably change is saving billions of dollars on the "War on Drugs"Yes kids don't know much about consequences. An effective way to stop drug abuse would be to educate kids and teens about the risks of marijuana abuse. Money that is used for education on weed would be much more well spent, than money that is used to lock up weed smokers.(Who btw will not just "stop" smoking weed) Any drug can be potentially addictive. Weed is no different and shouldn't be treated differently from cigarettes and alcohol.Legalizing marijuana will definitely solve the problem of frequent imprisonment. "Many drug users would still end up in jail, not merely just for smoking weed, but for what they do because they are high on the drug. Legalizing marijuana would not solve that problem."Not NEARLY, not even close, to as much people are jailed now just for smoking weed. People while high aren't that dangerous especially compared to when a person is drunk."Someone who is high on marijuana and in need of more could and would do a lot to get it, and that could involve injuring an innocent victim, or worse."Con is acting as if Marijuana is the equivalent of cocaine. Things shouldn't be disporportionalized here. This would happen in a very rare case since any high person is generally peaceful and harmless and this would only happen in a very extreme case of a long-term marijuana user as opposed to the casual user. "Parents also want their kids safe from pressure to do drugs and from having the availability of a drug like marijuana in the first place."Marijuana is going to available whether or not parents appreciate it. There will always be pressure and legality will not change a thing. The only thing that legality will change is the fact that taxpayers will no longer have to pay up billions of dollars for the imprisonment of weed smokers (which is not proven in any statistic as a deterrent), and it would no longer have the authorities infringe on civil rights. "Few public policies pose as great a threat to our fundamental civil liberties as the war on drugs. Since the 1970s, the U.S. judicial system has created a “drug exception” to the Constitution by permitting the erosion of our constitutional rights in the name of drug prohibition. Misguided drug policies have allowed extensive discrimination against drug users, women, people of color and the formerly incarcerated. The Drug Policy Alliance is a leading voice in the movement to reclaim the rights and freedoms infringed upon by the war on drugs. We believe that drug users should not be punished for what they put in their bodies, absent harm to others. We are working to eliminate drug policies that abuse the civil liberties of certain groups and individuals, as well as those that prevent people with drug convictions from rebuilding their lives. A war on drugs is simply a misnomer for a war on drug users." http://www.drugpolicy.org...Money will also be saved for use in education of drug abuse and much more effective educational remedies for the decrease in drug abuse.The Government shouldn't shove down it's morals in the law and jail people, for something they choose to do to their own bodies.The Government shouldn't invade civil libertiesThe Government shouldn't waste billions of dollars on jailing people for personal choiceThe Government should leave the people alone to make their own choices

Voters, please note that I will be posting a section on improvements, since my opponent is new to DDO. Refutations: 1. "It makes your skin sensitive to cold and heat". Compared to the side effects of many other illegal drugs this is very minor. 2. "Dehydration". Again, a very minor side effect. Contentions: 1. Marijuana has positive health effects. 2. If Alchohol and Cigarettes are legal, why not 'pot'? 3. It would bring lots of much-needed revenue to the state. 1. Marijuana has positive health effects. Marijuana, containing the chemical THC and commonly known as "pot" or "weed", has been known to reduce tumor growth. [1] 2. Alcohol and Tobacco. According to the CDC (Center For Disease Control) Alcohol is one of the leading causes of death in the US, and Tobacco follows not far behind. Marijuana is not even on the list. [2] 3. http://www.businessweek.com... Sources: 1. http://www.sciencedaily.com... 2. Cdc.gov Suggestions: 1. Make your arguments longer and more organized. Avoid run on sentences. 2. Cite sources. 3. Check your spelling before posting Voters Note: Do not vote on this debate. I want this to be a learning experience, and I want to avoid accusations of noob sniping.

Marijuana should not be legalized. Marijuana is the most commonly abused drug. You stated that "it isn't as harmful," however it still is harmful to one's body. Simply because it doesn't cause as many deaths as alcohol, it is still a drug that the body should not be in-taking.

Marijuana should NOT be legalized due to it's effects although it helps relax you it is also bad for you like for instance it makes your skin sensitive to cold and heat. It also makes your mouth dry which makes you drink more water, juice, soda etc. which can cause you to over hydrate. Back to you pro