Instigator / Pro
8
1417
rating
158
debates
32.59%
won
Topic
#2523

On Balance, Smoking Should be Criminalized in US

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
1

After 2 votes and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...

Danielle
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
13
1515
rating
3
debates
66.67%
won
Description

*cracks knuckles* let's do this. This can include E-cigarettes, or marijuana.

Smoking: the act of inhaling and exhaling the fumes of burning plant material.

Criminalized: punishable by law

It seems the deciding factor in this debate, was the pragmatic viability of banning cigarettes, and id probably agree with Danielle it isn't worthwhile to ban them wholly. Although its interesting to note, the only reason it isn't worthwhile to ban these substances is simply because of consumer need, spurred by their addictiveness. There was no black market pandemic made when we banned leaded fuel in most developed nations. It should be very easy to make cigarette alternatives (outside of ecigs) Which are wholly biodegradable or healthy for consumption with nicotine in. We all used to eat those sticks that looked like cigarettes with a tattoo inside (minus the sugar) lol

-->
@seldiora

Since I am 99% sure I have no chance of winning, I hope Danielle is fine with self-plagiarism.

Nice.

Expect a vote on this.

-->
@Ayyantu

I already showed the smoke free policies result in less smoking. The reason why this is one of my strongest is that I personify Smoking and I use powerful emotional imagery to craft my opening case. When you get too specific the criminalization falls apart.

I debated this topic recently so I'm biased -- and I can't vote yet anyway -- but I don't see how Pro ever wins if he doesn't show that criminalization leads to less smoking. It's the crux of Pro's side, and there's a lot of potential arguments here that weren't made (e.g. noting increased use of marijuana in states after legalization/regulation). Seldiora needs to work on this, especially since he says it's his strongest topic.

-->
@Danielle
@seldiora

Wooh, this'll be a long one, but I'm looking forward to reading it. I think I'll vote, but, just like this debate, it'll be longer than your average vote..

-->
@Danielle

sorry about my confusing paragraph. I meant to say that encouragement costs 300$/person, a greater amount than 0$/person (legislating a law)

-->
@blamonkey

you are welcome to vote, especially since you're one of the top debaters.

-->
@Danielle
@seldiora

I see people vote on conduct, but I'm pretty sure the CoC explicitly disallows simply voting for conduct alone when only one round was forfeited.

Would either of you object to me voting on this debate? I don't know when I can get around to it, but it's definitely interesting enough of a read.

-->
@Danielle

thanks for the debate. It helped even further boost my essay. I didn't realize I forgot to stress precisely how deadly it was, or how it was unique compared to other instances of Environment harm. I can't find a good place to insert Unique vs Alcohol, but it definitely helps to think about it.

-->
@Danielle

this system is same as DDO. I could make this win/loss next time if you want. Also, I know my counter-argument is flawed, but combined with environment + finance harms, the "my body my choice" begins to break down as it infers "yes, I can wash my body in a toxic river, polluting it even more if I want."

Hi everyone! Do people vote on "conduct" on DART or is it just a straight up win/loss vote?

I think I debated Roy twice and lost on topics like "Rush Limbaugh was slandered by racist charges," in which I took the position that Rush wasn't slandered because he IS racist. Limbaugh made statements like professional football looking like a game between "the Bloods and the Crips;" he said a black QB was only praised because the media wanted to see a black person do well; he constantly compared Obama to a monkey; he said the NAACP should have riot rehearsal and practice robberies; he said composite pics of wanted criminals all resemble Jesse Jackson - etc. So while I proved that Rush did in fact make racist remarks, there are some quotes that people attribute to him (I did not mention any here) that have never been sourced - and therefore technically Limbaugh WAS slandered if people made false or unsubstantiated claims about things he allegedly said but they can't prove. I didn't think about that technicality so I deserved to lose the debate, but not because Roy is a better debater ;) He did out perform me in that debate though because I should have realized that 'gotcha' argument and I didn't. So Roy definitely won that debate but I maintain Limbaugh is racist.

I also debated him on whether the humanities were underrated in education, and he won despite making arguments like "teaching Philosophy would be child abuse" so there's that. I did not lose that debate. I think a lot of people just really wanted to see me lose and that's fine. I get it! I personally like to challenge myself and tend to take a lot of devil's advocate positions. For this debate I really do think criminalizing cigarettes would be terrible so I'm looking forward to a thought provoking discussion. I don't care about winning and losing cuz I realized all the wins in the world don't translate to any real world success lol. I'm just happy to chat with you guys and look forward to a great conversation. I could see why Pro takes the position he does and hopefully I can get him to consider my POV as well.

gimme the medal

Danielle: comes acting like a noob, leaves champion of the site

-->
@seldiora

I’m sure it would have depended on the debate topic, but in general, setting RoyLatham as the bar is setting it about as high as a bar could go on DDO. Also, for the record, happy to have you debating on this site, Danielle. Never got the chance to debate you on DDO, would be great to have that chance here sometime.

-->
@SirAnonymous

I'm aware how strong Danielle is, but Roy has consistently beaten her.

-->
@SirAnonymous

Don't pressure him.

-->
@seldiora

You might know already, but check the fourth name on this list.
https://www.debate.org/people/leaders/

-->
@Danielle

No problem! Welcome to the site, I'm looking forward to seeing this debate, I was thinking about accepting it. To a good debate and all!

-->
@Theweakeredge

Thanks! It's my first one on DART.

-->
@Danielle

No, if you look at the under debating it specifies that it's waiting for the instigator's first argument, the instigator is the person who has made the debate, you are the contender.

Am I supposed to post the first arguments?