Is Legalizing Marijuana a Mistake? Live Debate
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- According to an October 2022 Pew survey, “88% of US adults say that marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use.” While marijuana legalization is gaining more and more cultural acceptance, effectively regulating drugs has long flummoxed policy and lawmakers. Some are even starting to have second thoughts, especially when it comes to how to practically enforce legal sales. In fact, voters in Oklahoma - one of the nation’s leading weed markets -overwhelmingly rejected recreational legalization earlier this year, even though voters backed medical marijuana legalization by a double-digit margin in 2018. Those who argue “Yes” for marijuana legalization say legalization creates more problems for our legal system because it requires extra enforcement to crack down on already robust illegal markets to make way for new, regulated, and legal markets. Additionally, competition from illegal weed markets is undercutting legal sales, which means the expected revenue stream from a legalized industry is far lower than expected. Those who argue “No” say legalization can reduce the burden on law enforcement and criminal justice systems, allowing resources to be redirected to more pressing issues. They also highlight marijuana’s medical benefits, such as for pain management and treatment of certain health conditions, which have made a difference in people’s lives.
With this context, it’s time to debate - and reconsider - “Is Legalizing Marijuana A Mistake?”
Arguing Yes: Paul J. Larkin, Jr, Senior Legal Research Fellow in the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation and Teresa Haley, senior policy advisor at the Foundation for Drug Policy Solution
Arguing No: Toi Hutchinson, CEO of the Marijuana Policy Project; former member of the Illinois Senate, and Cat Packer, Director of Drug Markets and Legal Regulation at Drug Policy Alliance
Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates
Timestamps:
(1:32) Paul Larkin argues yes
(4:56) Toi Hutchinson argues no
(8:16) Teresa Haley argues yes
(11:18) Cat Packer argues no
(16:11) Is smoking marijuana a private or public matter?
(21:31) Debate over the potency of marijuana
(26:22) Debate on how criminalization of marijuana affects minority communities
(39:00) Nick Gillespie asks both sides to discuss the benefits of legalization
(42:49) An audience question about how to talk to your children about drugs
(49:52) The contrast between state and federal-level legalization
(56:13) Closing statements begin between all four debaters
#opentodebate #livedebate #debate #marijuana #legalization
Debate recorded live @TheFreedomFest in Memphis.
===================================
Subscribe: / @opentodebateorg
Official site: opentodebate.org/
Newsletter: opentodebate.o...
X: / opentodebateorg
Facebook: / beopentodebate
LinkedIn: / opentodebate
Instagram: / opentodebateorg
TikTok: / open.to.debate
Open to Debate Apple Podcasts: tinyurl.com/bd...
Open to Debate Spotify Podcasts: tinyurl.com/22...
===================================
~-~~-~~~-~~-~
Please watch: "Unresolved: The Iran Threat"
• Unresolved: The Iran T...
~-~~-~~~-~~-~
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.82[1/2] แก๊ง 3 สาวเพื่อนซี้บุก CAMPปลิ้นครั้งนี้ห้ามเสียอาการ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_6WUjXHe1TM/mqdefault.jpg)
Timestamps:
(1:32) Paul Larkin argues yes
(4:56) Toi Hutchinson argues no
(8:16) Teresa Haley argues yes
(11:18) Cat Packer argues no
(16:11) Is smoking marijuana a private or public matter?
(21:31) Debate over the potency of marijuana
(26:22) Debate on how criminalization of marijuana affects minority communities
(39:00) Nick Gillespie asks both sides to discuss the benefits of legalization
(42:49) An audience question about how to talk to your children about drugs
(49:52) The contrast between state and federal-level legalization
(56:13) Closing statements begin between all four debaters
Guys, I'm thinking we are asking the wrong question here. Should cannabis be legalized. I would suggest a better discussion would be one where we assume cannabis is legal and we ask you to make a case for making it illegal. Can anyone out there make that case?
This is heated haha. One side is so clearly wrong. Speaking over and spreading lies.
Why is marijuana worse than consuming alcohol ? My wife had serious ailments and gets relief using marijuana.
Another benefit is the fact marijuana does not have the undesireable side affects her prescription medicine have.
Lots cheaper than her prescription medication as well. As far as smoking marijuana goes, breathing dangerous materials is unhealthy, and that goes way beyond smoking marijuana. I'll bet more people suffer respiratory ailments from industrial pollution and auto pollution than other causes.
If alcohol was illegal now, do you think we should make that legal??
As a pro-marijuana advocate, I agree that smoking it is not not healthy. You're correct, the ingestion of any smoke or vape is not good for the lungs or brain. But what about all the other ways of consuming marijuana? I noticed these people focused more on the smoking of weed vs all the other ways marijuana can be consumed.
I think weed should be legal but from my experience and what study shows that it’s not completely harmless. Also with so many different forms of of smoking THC such as vape or delta 8 products, more and more people are overdosing. I have had CHS twice. My buddy who uses the vape also had CHS but he had it worse. It caused damage to his kidneys. Dr said had he kept smoking he could have ended up in a coma.
Weed today is more potent then it was even 10 years ago plus we have more ways to consume it. It should be legal but to act like it’s harmless and have no potential harm is immature and idiotic
Only loly-pop is harmless😂😂👍
Still More benign than caffeine with no known LD50/neurodegenerative side effects. CHS is exceedingly rare, even among chronic cannabis users. Most of the adverse effects associated with incessant weed use - impaired memory, brains fog, etc - can be effectively tapered off/mitigated with cessation and ample time (2 months or so). don’t smoke bud with a potency exceeding 10% concentration, as it can exacerbate adverse effects.
The substance is not really inherently harmful or problematic, but your relationship with the substance is.
That's vaping though. That's artificial and should be considered irreverent to "should weed be legal?". Also, your buddy couldn't handle the smoke, that was life telling him he can't hang, not be a big wet wussy and vape. My 2 cents. Take it or leave it. PEACE!
i like how the "Yes" side brings up vehicular deaths from cannabis intoxication but doesn't even mention alcohol-related vehicular deaths -- if that's the guideline for banning something, alcohol should've been banned forever.
also, i absolutely HATE when people turn these debates into their own personal grudge arena
that lady on the "Yes" side was not only useless in defending her points, she also kept talking over people and even kept interrupting her own debate teammate
She seemed to be just making shit up at several points.
Reschedule Alcohol 🍸
IMO she didn't want him as a teammate. He didn't have much of an argument...and for the most part agreed with his opponents. It seemed his sole purpose was to play the pharmaceutical angle.
Yeah I think I can see your point of view, but to persuade in a debate takes some level of EQ -- and she was just missing that. Also, there is zero real factual basis to control MJ stricter than alcohol. It's an intoxicant that has repeatedly proven to not cause violence, whereas alcohol triggers that in many but not a majority of a drinkers.@@conork8177
Nah, we tried that and it failed miserably. Prohibition is really the worst control mechanism we have. Better control mechanisms involve education, treatment/therapy, and not having cliffs (20 -> I can't drink a lick legally, 21 -> I can buy the bar) @@marcsandhaus9482
Well from my experience you plays two alcoholics together they will be trouble that's just the nature of alcohol however get you two potheads or weed heads add some people call them you're not going to see acts of violence instead you going to see two people get the munchies eat a lot laugh a lot then go to sleep
The guy with his big three reasons is a dope. Hard to imagine the thought process that could guide such idiocy.
Is legal alcohol a mistake? Yes
This was not a debate. This is a maquade of a QnA.
how can an employer find out that you are lying about being convicted of selling when all court records of the conviction have been destroyed n an expungement ?
Why would it matter? Weed in general shouldn't be a crime
Make it legal for 21 and up so simple
Freedomfest? Hahahahahahaaaaaaaa... pass.
pass pass puff
@@robinsss Puff Puff Pass
Haters gona hate😂
Huge mistake
One of his arguments is it will hurt children. No, it will not. Children are not allowed to purchase or consume the product recreationally. Same with alcohol. Is your position that we should be allowed to sell Jack Daniels to 8th graders? It's no different here.
i hate that all the opposing side arguments always default to the same things its either kids or fatal car crashes find a new argument or at least do some research before coming to something like this there are a lot of reasons that you could find to keep weed illegal but the reasons, they give are just terrible.
I appreciate this moderator, but can he please stop people when they are repeatedly interrupting one another? Maintain some order so that it can be a coherent debate.
medical emergency, guess who's not going to get anesthesia...?????
1+ hours of my time... wasted. Thank you open to debate.
he's still the worst moderator ever
Incredibly week arguments on the against legalization side. It’s hilarious how many of their arguments are basically arguments for legalization 🤣
You're not entirely wrong, but the legalization side is making some silly arguments, too.
@@kenhiett5266such as?
Can you give specific examples?
I can give specific examples why it shouldn't be legal! Young people will find it easier to gain access, and it's known to lead to a range of psychiatric disorders.
Weed leads to dependency, and unlike alcohol, it remains in the system (for testing purposes) for days .. hard to get a job, that requires high levels of sobriety (drug tests).
Marijuana leads to dependency. Why do we need it??
Ps. I don't mean medical pain relief, for specific prescriptive cases...
thanks
Alcoholics hate pot. And their arguments are ridiculous. Maybe because they are alcoholics.
I remember when I was naive enough to believe legalization was a positive solution.
lol
Why does anyone actually respect this platform?
The debates that this organization hosts are just the political right debating the even further politically right and religious. The participants are always the same and therefore the results are as well.
This whole platform is just a silly masquerade of objectivity. In reality this "Debate platform" is just a microcosm of what we see in the broader american political landscape these days -an untethered religious zealot (in this case the Heritage Foundation) "debating" an very very minority elitist Representative programmed by his corporate associations to merely respond (albeit sometimes SHOCKINGLY but nevertheless mildly) to the propositions of the former.
If this "debate" was a percentage of the population this is debate between 2 parties that represent the ideas of about 33 million people out of the entire population of 350 million americans.
This isnt a debate, this is an advertisement. An expensive one too, as it only really appeals to those with too much time and a misgiving that these 2 groups are "we the people." Its mental masturbation for those with Ivy League educations and nothing more.
At least with the last one, intelligence squared, there was a more colorful logo. I bet I could template out this "debate" with an AI model and mimic the next 100 debates this platform creates with near perfect accuracy. Its a joke.
This is a disingenuous debate. As usuale ... Stop influencing adults lives via false narratives. Its called freedom.
Legalizing heroin isn't freedom, and this issue is just slightly less destructive. Anarchy isn't a productive way to run a society, and we know because there's this thing we can look to called history.
It needs to be rescheduled. So that the FDA can get involved with the production of cannabis products. Then an edible is both a drug and a food. Therefore subject to all the laws regarding food prep and drug safety in the United States. Means doing inspections on all cannabis companies. To ensure consumer transparency and truth in labeling. If it says it’s packed with 100mg of THC, strain specific, then it best be! Not 88mg or even 125mg. This information is extremely important in order to dose precisely.
Nope i been smoking since the 70s….
Puff, 💨 Puff 💨 every day = about 1 oz a year😂🎉
I found it hugely ironic that Paul, in one breath was saying "Yes, we know THC can stay in your blood for weeks", but in the next saying THC intoxication was in fact causing vehicular accidents and even deaths. Maybe I'm just sheltered, but I have never heard of a report- not one single report- anywhere stating that any vehicular accident/death was caused *solely* by the ingestion of marijuana. Where absolutely zero other substances were found and *only* marijuana came up positive. Theresa (the woman on the 'yes' side) also stated earlier in the conversation that there were vehicular deaths due to THC intoxication. What I'd like to know is, in those cases they're referring to, how long ago was the THC consumed? Was it 5 minutes before? Was the driver presently intoxicated? Or had the THC been in these peoples' systems for several weeks? Just because a person has an accident and tests positive for THC doesn't mean that the driver was stoned at the time of the accident. If I go to a bachelorette party, then 3 weeks later I'm driving home, hit a patch of black ice and cause an accident- sure, blood tests will show that THC is present in my system, but that does not mean that I was intoxicated at the time of the accident/collision. The 'yes' side is saying that this is the case when, again, later in the debate they admit and discuss that there's currently no "breathalyzer" type test yet for THC consumption. So they don't even know if THC was responsible for these accidents. Maybe the driver was swerving to miss hitting a dog running across the road. We have no idea. All they know is that THC showed up positive on the test and so, of course it caused the accident.
Also, to Theresa's comment on kids feeling shame because they come to school smelling like weed. 1. What does she expect parents to do? What if the mother has cancer, and smoking marijuana is the only thing that can help reduce her pain and nausea and help her eat? Should that parent stop treating their condition? 2. So that's why we allow other ways of consuming marijuana, it doesn't have to be smoked. It can be vaped or eaten. For people with physical ailments like joint pain, there's lotions and analgesics. They make THC sodas. So weed doesn't *have* to be smoked. It just so happens to be the case that raw flower is the cheapest form or marijuana available, as opposed to edibles for example or vapes. At my local dispensary, a 1g vape cartridge is $60. 1/8th oz of flower is $30-$40. 3. If those kids feel ashamed because they smell like weed, the solution isn't to criminalize the drug. The solution is to stop the stigmas surrounding marijuana use, in general, so that kids have no reason to feel ashamed. But all the 'yes' side wants to do is shame people for using it. "It's going to destroy your life!", "You're going to become an addict!" "You'll never be able to get a job!", "If you smoke you will become a deadbeat loser who just sits on the couch all day".
We're not going to solve any problems if we continually shame people for doing something that is not a shameful act. There is no shame in using marijuana. FFS, I live and work in an illegal state, yet almost my entire kitchen smokes. My executive chef. All my sous chefs, some front of house staff. We all smoke. We all know it. We talk about it. We're open about it. We don't hide our use. We don't feel ashamed of it. We're always going out, smoking. We're almost all always stoned during work, bosses know we do it, they don't care. They don't care. And you know what? It makes us a better team as a result. We work together better. We communicate better. We're more relaxed, more focused. Anybody who's ever worked in a kitchen will tell you just how stressful it is. And, we are one of the most successful restaurants in our state, we are a 5 star multi-million dollar restaurant (we clear on average about $15m a year), we just passed our recent health inspection with a 99, and the only docking we received was due to damaged floor tiles, simply due to wear and tear. Our restaurant is virtually spotless. Sure, if you work for the government, or a multi-billion dollar corporation then yes, you'll struggle. This idea that you can't get a job if you smoke weed just isn't true. Employers really do not care as much as the 'yes' side will want you to believe. Hell, most employers smoke themselves, and they'll join you.
There's no reason to keep it illegal. They keep saying "but the kids", "but the kids". Then why not fight for the re-prohibition of alcohol and the prohibition of tobacco?
Plastic cups and bags can be replaced by hemp. It will be better for the environment because it is biodegradable.
Both sides of this debate are highly annoying but I think the anti weed boomers slightly edge out the dude weed zoomers in terms of annoyance
Marijuana shouldn't have been legalized for whatever reason the support legalization. The reason behind the legalization has nothing to do with its benefits to the consumer, but industries are gone off shore which used to pay a lot money as taxes. So elected officials can only tax the public in so many ways. Real estate, food, parking, moving violations, ... One Illinois politician wanted to raise soda (pop) with an excuse that these drinks are unhealthy to the public. That was just a grand scheme to get millions of public money to satisfy the flow income. So legal marijuana brings hundreds of million dollars to Illinois, Colorado, ...
If You REALLY want to find out how dangerous i the consumption of marijuana. Go to Charlotte, N.C. and Colombia, S.C.
"The reason behind the legalization has nothing to do with its benefits to the consumer..." This is simply false. The legalization of marijuana very greatly benefits the consumer. 1) because they can purchase products from a reliable source, such a dispensary vs on the street. A dispensary which can help educate the consumer about the product(s) they are consuming, potency, dosing, etc. 2) Legalization reduces the stigmas associated with use. 3) Many states even allow provisions for people to grow their own plants, which is far cheaper than buying from a dispensary, therefor saving the consumer money in the long run. 4) Legalization encourages conversation and education. 5) Legalization means more studies can be performed. The more studies there are, the more we can learn about this plant and any potential dangers or risks associated with use. Education leads to making better and more informed decisions.
So there's just 5 ways off the top of my head in which marijuana can be beneficial to the consumer.
sedentary lifestyles are truly the most evil way of existence. marijuana encourages sedentary lifestyles more than any other substance. getting high and scrolling through memes and sitting on a couch for hours is a true waste of the human experience. making weed legal will make more people sedentary meme scrollers. sad existence.
Exactly. Smoking dope causes people to have little motivation to get and do things.
I think sugar does the same thing. Let's arrest all the sugar addicts.
This a stereotype that just simply isn't true. Born out of the ignorance and fear of the war on drugs. Some of the most ambitious and successful people on the planet smoke weed. Not to mention, not everybody who uses cannabis products "smokes weed". There's literally a multitude of different ways to use/consume THC products. If a person has cancer and using cannabis to treat their illness, would you call them lazy and unmotivated? I have epilepsy, anxiety, depression, PTSD and epilepsy. I used one drug- marijuana- to treat everything. Very few side effects. I've done very well at work, work often 50-60 hours a week with no issues, just received a significant raise. Would you say that that is being lazy and unmotivated and sedentary?
Getting weed delivered is "actually slavery"
- Charlie Kirk
Making weed legal will make more sedentary meme acrollers.
- @tronstank7290 2024