It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."
"the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
"Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
"Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing"
"You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother."
"Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."
Why is Marijuana Illegal
We’re here to talk about rational limits, and the logical reasons for them.
we should expect nothing less than individual personal harm and national distress
Like any addictive substance
marijuana can be harnessed for the greater good
We have chosen (wisely) to keep this temptation at arm’s length. To do anything less would be morally and ethically “wrong.”
The simple fact of the matter is that humans are prone to abuse marijuana
They didn't ban a healthy product. They outlawed a social scourge
that addictive substances are not to be trifled with
Marijuana is regulated solely because of the potential for its abuse
we can't resist the temptations of alcohol, tobacco, and fast food
According to an FBI agent I spoke to three years ago, on 9/11 the FBI had about 1,100 agents looking for terrorists," Wooldridge said. "They also had 2,400 agents helping the DEA bust drug dealers and their labs
notion that the majority needs to be protected from a small number of people and things that would do it harm
His recanted argument now turns on the notion that we'd be saving money and lives if we stopped trying to limit access to addictive substances
The Timeline demonstrates that where marijuana is concerned, we've been ever-so-slowly learning our lesson when it comes to this addictive drug.
like alcohol and tobacco, which are both poorly regulated classes substances which have done great harm to our society.
we're not as serious as we could be about stopping their abuse
We know this stuff is more addictive than alcohol and mainstream tobacco products
1992: “Marijuana is ten times more dangerous than 20 years ago.” —Presidential Candidate Bill Clinton (Who did not inhale?)
1986: “Marijuana leads to homosexuality, the breakdown of the immune system, and therefore to AIDS.” —Carlton Turner
1985: “Marijuana use makes you sterile.” —Reagan Administration
1974: “interferes with reproduction, disease resistance, and basic biological processes.” —Daily Oklahoman, 11-19-74
1948: “Marihuana leads to pacifism and Communist brainwashing.” —Anslinger, before Congress
1973: “Marijuana increases breast size in males.”
Seventy years later over 700,000 Americans, including Willie Nelson, are arrested each year for the simple possession of an herb that when scientifically tested has proven to be harmless compared to alcohol and tobacco. In all 11 states that have had a chance to vote on legalizing the medical use of marijuana, the voting public has approved it over the objections and interference of the federal authorities.
In today’s world nearly everyone knows someone who has smoked pot. Should we send 20 to 30 million Americans to jail because the state and federal governments cannot admit a mistake has been made?
Text If the number of drug abusers doubled or tripled, the social costs would be enormous.
TextThe economic impact of drug abuse on businesses whose employees abuse drugs can be significant. While many drug abusers are unable to attain or hold full-time employment, those who do work put others at risk, particularly when employed in positions where even a minor degree of impairment could be catastrophic; airline pilots, air traffic controllers, train operators, and bus drivers are just a few examples.
TextDrug use and drug addiction in America will increase substantially. Do we want our commercial pilots, heart surgeons, teachers, police officers and legislators to be incapacitated or impaired while carrying out their job duties? If drugs were legalized, workplace drug use restrictions would become moot.
legalization seems like a very expensive policy indeed. And who will foot the bill? Either common citizens will through taxes for government aid programs, or through increased insurance premiums.
de-criminalizing an addictive substance
The law that makes it possible for you to buy marijuana will in time make it possible for you to buy…other things.
The billions we spend now reduce crime, and to a lesser extent, the rate of addiction
Among the winners, as in all wars, are those who profit financially: the traffickers involved in the $450 billion per year drug trade; the corporations and financial institutions laundering the estimated $250 billion in drug money that flows through the US economy each year; the prison industry, which now employs more people than any Fortune 500 company except General Motors and generates an estimated $40 billion per year; the corporations that rely on cheap prison labor for both manufacturing and billing operations. And so on.
Among the losers, certainly, are our inner-city African-American and Hispanic communities, along with the police, drug dealers, and innocent bystanders killed in action. Certainly the 400,000 prisoners of the drug war sitting in jail or in prison or awaiting trial, more than 100,000 of them for mere possession
Deaths from drugs have never been higher. In 1996, they numbered 14,843, more than double the drug-related deaths reported in 1979
Do we really save money by making it easier for people to buy and use addictive substances that are known to have long-term health risks
Bear in mind that increased drug use will also lead to an increase in drug-related death. More drug users will result in more deaths
We COULD de-criminalize alcohol
If drugs were legalized, workplace drug use restrictions would become moot.
Legalization doesn't make the drug dealers go away
The study found that arrests for marijuana account for nearly all of the increase in drug arrests seen during the 1990s. The report also found that one in four people in state prisons for marijuana offenses can be classified as a "low-level offender," and it estimated that $4 billion a year is spent on arresting and prosecuting marijuana crimes.
Justin totally loses it here. The links either back up sempers statements in round 1 or deflect away from mj into coc aine, heroin or tobacco. The last 2 links are the killers here as neither establish mj as addictive and yet in his last statement, he says they are;
We know this stuff is more addictive than alcohol and mainstream tobacco products.
Hitting the link shows no such statement. In fact, it rates mj as less addictive than caffeine
The debate spirals down from there. I'd be willing to carry on with this, but it would be senseless.
Justin fails miserably to successfully bolster his argument with any facts whatsoever. It's almost painfully obvious that his heart is not with his position and that he would have preferred it to be the other way around.
semperfortis, on the other hand, is consistantly correct and augments his position with effective links and sound arguments.
After reading this one, I've got to give it to semperfortis.
semperfortis was spot on, provided plenty of information that Justin did not even attempt to refute. And I think Justin's biggest downfall was his continued effort to assume how semperfortis would approach this debate, and inform us how he thought his opponent would progress through this subject. All the while he talked about his opponent, he failed to address his own stance.
This was a little more lob sided than I expected.
Talk about your all-time classic smack-downs. I never expected either of these two to get very far ahead, but Justin just wasn't himself. His links contradicted him, he refused to engage on the issues and persisted in dismissing cogent arguments and proceeding as if he had won exchanges that never really even took place.
Semper on the other hand was firing on all cylinders. He made good use of history, which was crucial to establishing the primary reason that marijuana is illegal and strictly enforced against. Both debaters at times lost sight of the fact that the topic didn't explicitly require them to endorse or oppose legalization, but semperfortis was closer to the mark.
Look at the stars. Look at Justin's links. Look at the history of racism and pseudoscience that semperfortis demonstrates on the anti-mj side. No contest. Semperfortis wins.
In the final I have to give the nod to Justin. Both sides did an excellent job all the way through the debate and should be proud of thier performances. I would not want to face either in this format.