Legalization of marijuana debated across cultures
By: Allison Marino
Issue date: 11/20/09 Section: News
The British came to DePauw Wednesday night. They weren't opposing independence - just the legalization of marijuana.
DePauw's Debate Society took on the British National Debate team at the public debate in Watson Forum. DePauw senior Aaron Dicker and junior Kevin Milne supported the resolution to legalize marijuana. Graduate students from the British team, Dan Bradley from the University of Manchester and Andrew Tuffin of King's College London, took the opposition. Geoff Klinger, professor of communication and theatre, moderated the debate.
Dicker began by stating legalizing marijuana would contribute to ending the war on drugs.
"If legalized, it would be easier to focus on hard drugs, not just marijuana," he said. "Brands could safely regulate marijuana and gangs and drug cartels will not be able to operate as much, because marijuana is the greatest cash flow."
Bradley spoke next on the dangers of marijuana, saying its legalization would be detrimental to the health of the nation.
"Marijuana is more dangerous these days as compared to the 1960s," he said. "Marijuana legalization could cause an increase in cancer. Being stoned is not a good state of mind to be in, and it would increase drug use and involvement in drug culture."
DePauw's representatives responded by arguing the legalization of prostitution, which is prohibited in Britain and the United States, has been successful in places like Holland. They also maintained people can keep a drug use a secret even if marijuana is legalized.
"Holland has legalized prostitution and prostitutes are living a better life," Milne said. "It does not necessarily mean that executives' secret lifestyles will be discovered."
Milne and Dicker also said the use of marijuana is less dangerous than hard drugs, making it easier to regulate.
The British debaters countered, saying marijuana users typically don't have the means of escaping the cycle they are caught in.
"Marijuana is less bad than heroin, but so is jaywalking," Tuffin said. "People use drugs, alcohol and the like to escape. Many drug users are not lucky enough to have the opportunity to escape their life."
After audience members asked questions of both teams, Bradley delivered the opposition's closing argument, directly addressing a point made by DePauw's team.
He said the legalization of marijuana would "not make drug empires collapse. Instead, they will take advantage by selling dangerous drugs. We don't make dangerous things legal, do we?"
DePauw closed with a strong argument by Dicker, but in the end, a standing vote declared the British National Debate Team the winner, with 35 voting in favor of the British National Debate team and 15 in favor of DePauw's team.
Bradley said the British team defeated Wabash Tuesday night in a landslide vote.
"We beat Wabash 55 to nil last night," he said.
The four participants said, regardless of the outcome, the debate went well. Bradley said he thought the debate members from DePauw did a good job, and the audience was fully engaged.
"The competition was very good. The audience was watching and thinking at the same time," he said.
Government arguments
• Legalizing marijuana will not increase the number of people smoking because the U.S. already has one of the highest percentages of pot use
• It will refocus the drug war to harder drugs like cocaine and heroin.
• Legalizing marijuana will eliminate the drug cartels who traffic it.
Opposition arguments
• Legalizing marijuana will increase the number of people using it, which has been shown to either make them non-productive or increase risks of paranoid schizophrenia.
• It won't stop the drug trade (just switch to more drugs).
• It leads to dangerous, high doses of tetrahydrocannabinol.
DePauw's Debate Society took on the British National Debate team at the public debate in Watson Forum. DePauw senior Aaron Dicker and junior Kevin Milne supported the resolution to legalize marijuana. Graduate students from the British team, Dan Bradley from the University of Manchester and Andrew Tuffin of King's College London, took the opposition. Geoff Klinger, professor of communication and theatre, moderated the debate.
Dicker began by stating legalizing marijuana would contribute to ending the war on drugs.
"If legalized, it would be easier to focus on hard drugs, not just marijuana," he said. "Brands could safely regulate marijuana and gangs and drug cartels will not be able to operate as much, because marijuana is the greatest cash flow."
Bradley spoke next on the dangers of marijuana, saying its legalization would be detrimental to the health of the nation.
"Marijuana is more dangerous these days as compared to the 1960s," he said. "Marijuana legalization could cause an increase in cancer. Being stoned is not a good state of mind to be in, and it would increase drug use and involvement in drug culture."
DePauw's representatives responded by arguing the legalization of prostitution, which is prohibited in Britain and the United States, has been successful in places like Holland. They also maintained people can keep a drug use a secret even if marijuana is legalized.
"Holland has legalized prostitution and prostitutes are living a better life," Milne said. "It does not necessarily mean that executives' secret lifestyles will be discovered."
Milne and Dicker also said the use of marijuana is less dangerous than hard drugs, making it easier to regulate.
The British debaters countered, saying marijuana users typically don't have the means of escaping the cycle they are caught in.
"Marijuana is less bad than heroin, but so is jaywalking," Tuffin said. "People use drugs, alcohol and the like to escape. Many drug users are not lucky enough to have the opportunity to escape their life."
After audience members asked questions of both teams, Bradley delivered the opposition's closing argument, directly addressing a point made by DePauw's team.
He said the legalization of marijuana would "not make drug empires collapse. Instead, they will take advantage by selling dangerous drugs. We don't make dangerous things legal, do we?"
DePauw closed with a strong argument by Dicker, but in the end, a standing vote declared the British National Debate Team the winner, with 35 voting in favor of the British National Debate team and 15 in favor of DePauw's team.
Bradley said the British team defeated Wabash Tuesday night in a landslide vote.
"We beat Wabash 55 to nil last night," he said.
The four participants said, regardless of the outcome, the debate went well. Bradley said he thought the debate members from DePauw did a good job, and the audience was fully engaged.
"The competition was very good. The audience was watching and thinking at the same time," he said.
Government arguments
• Legalizing marijuana will not increase the number of people smoking because the U.S. already has one of the highest percentages of pot use
• It will refocus the drug war to harder drugs like cocaine and heroin.
• Legalizing marijuana will eliminate the drug cartels who traffic it.
Opposition arguments
• Legalizing marijuana will increase the number of people using it, which has been shown to either make them non-productive or increase risks of paranoid schizophrenia.
• It won't stop the drug trade (just switch to more drugs).
• It leads to dangerous, high doses of tetrahydrocannabinol.

Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 11
Conservative for Legalization
posted 11/20/09 @ 10:31 AM EST
It appalls me that the majority still believe the propaganda and lies of prohibition and that the British side did not offer facts supporting their position (because there are none). (Continued…)
Conservative4Change
Conservative for Legalization
posted 11/20/09 @ 10:33 AM EST
It appalls me that the majority still believe the propaganda and lies of prohibition and that the British side did not offer facts supporting their position (because there are none). (Continued…)
Tom
posted 11/20/09 @ 11:35 AM EST
"Marijuana legalization could cause an increase in cancer. Being stoned is not a good state of mind to be in, and it would increase drug use and involvement in drug culture. (Continued…)
Concerned Parent
posted 11/20/09 @ 12:52 PM EST
Sending people to jail puts them into a much worse state of both mind and body than whatever negative state of mind they might enter by using marijuana. (Continued…)
ConcernedParent
posted 11/20/09 @ 2:00 PM EST
The marijuana debate is not just about medicine. It's time to drive a wedge between the criminal drug dealers and our kids. Licensing, taxing, and regulating marijuana will put the drug dealers out of business and protect our children. (Continued…)
Dennis Lehnst
posted 11/21/09 @ 6:03 PM EST
There was no mention from either side on the merits of cannabis vs alcohol. For those of us who are fed up with the violence and distruction attributed to alcohol the message here is, WE WANT A SAFER ALTERNATIVE TO ALCOHOL. (Continued…)
denbee
posted 11/21/09 @ 7:42 PM EST
What this debate missed is the fact that millions of us are fed up with alcohol and its destructive and violent history. We simply want a safer alternative to alcohol and that would be cannabis. (Continued…)
RFWoodstock
posted 11/22/09 @ 2:02 PM EST
Valid medicinal value, it's a victimless crime, the War on Drugs WAY too costly, too many arrests for simple possession, tax it and use the money to pay for health insurance and to reduce the deficit. (Continued…)
iphone scale
posted 3/06/10 @ 9:30 AM EST
I din't understand how goverments can ignore the people, the scientific research and all the other arguments that are in favor of legal marijuana.
But on the other hand they are the most ignorant people of all. (Continued…)
K2 Incense
posted 5/26/10 @ 11:46 AM EST
I agree with denbee. I mean, you never hear about a couple of pot heads beating their wives... alcohol is usually to blame. Thanks for posting this!
Post a Comment