CreateDebate


Debate Info

19
10
For Against
Debate Score:29
Arguments:33
Total Votes:30
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 For (14)
 
 Against (10)

Debate Creator

Elvira(3446) pic



Drug addiction should be treated as a medical problem, not a criminal one

For

Side Score: 19
VS.

Against

Side Score: 10

I agree that drug addiction should be treated as a medical problem, not a criminal one. Nobody should be charged with a crime for being addicted to something.

That is ONLY the drug addiction though, and the addict should be made to answer for any crimes (however minor) committed even if the argument is made that they were caused by the addiction. If the addict has killed someone for drugs, stolen property to sell for drugs, or anything to that effect, the drug addiction should not be considered a mitigating factor for charging and sentencing the individual.

Compare it to alcohol. If somebody is a harmless drunk, I wouldn't advocate throwing him in jail. If his poison happened to be heroin instead of alcohol, that wouldn't change anything. But at the same time, I would prosecute the hell out of someone who damaged property or killed someone while intoxicated, regardless of whether it was alcohol or heroin.

Side: For
1 point

IMHO drug addiction is seen and treated as a medical problem. Clinics for recovery are everywhere. Insurance companies will pay for such treatment, and that's saying something.

The criminal aspect comes from our societies un-acceptance of the use of some very harmful drugs. Right or wrong, most of us agree with the laws we make. Legalization of any criminal activity within a society must come from the majority of its individual members.

Side: For
1 point

Yes, I think that it should be treated like a medical problem e.g a disease, not as a criminal one because drug addiction is after all addiction and If you are addicted to something then It's not a criminal problem, you need medical help. You need help from a doctor not police. At the end of the day, doctor is the one that can help you. how is a policeman supposed to help you with an unhealthy addiction?

Side: For
1 point

Okay , to be honest I think drug abuse should be a medical issue , I just said it should treated as a criminal one to play devil's advocate because I figured everyone else would say it's a medical one .

Side: For
1 point

I personally agree that if more help was available then drug addiction would be almost all gone. It is easy to post a threat, saying that a prison sentence will be in order for any person who comes into contact with drugs; but for the majority of addicted persons, the hunger for the substance is just too strong - the desperate need will overpower any fear of going to prison. However, I believe that with the right support and help people can actually start to come off drugs and change their lives for the better. Even if the medical treatment was authorized cold turkey, that would do the world of good. We cannot complain about the number of people wasting their time and money on the misuse of drugs when we do not offer a stable treatment to help them, apart from the threat of prison. These people are humans and their lives deserve to be saved by professional treatment just as other illness' are treated.

Side: For
1 point

If it is treated as a medical problem what would be the treatment options ? Cold turkey for the patients or use small amounts to curve their addiction ? Using either method as an absolute would be a bad idea seeing that every patient would be different . So , the establishment the patients are in would have drugs for different treatments . If you have certain patients on cold turkey treatment they will likely steal drugs meant for the curving treatment . This would put the workers at risk . If you have certain patients on the curving the addiction treatment , they would still likely be addicted seeing as they are being given drugs and might steal drugs , again putting workers at risk . On the issue of health care , who pays for their health care ? If they are the only one in their family or the family breadwinner their own insurance couldn't possibly pay for this treatment seeing as they will be unable to pay the insurance bill . So then who pays for the health care ? People who work jobs will pay higher taxes for the treatment . Seeing as how pricey health care is compared to the taxes you will have to pay for the addicts to be in jail . Addiction needs to be treated as a criminal problem . Seeing as how the addiction could cause them to harm others or themselves .

Side: Against
Atrag(5666) Disputed
2 points

You have a very strange view of drug takers. I have occasionally taken drugs (possession is completely legal in Spain) but I would never consider stealing anything. I'm not addicted but I think if I were I could earn enough money to fuel it. Why should I be locked away for doing something that doesn't harm anyone?

Stealing - victim is the owner of the goods and you should get punished.

Causing harm to others - victim and punishment.

Whereas:

Having an addiction that is well managed - no harm and shouldn't be a crime.

Having an addiction that causes harm to yourself - no one else's damn business unless you steal or cause harm to others which is usually already a crime!!! There is absolutely no valid argument for making possession of drugs illegal. It is victimless.

Side: For
Debater345(170) Disputed
1 point

I'm fine with drug users , my problem is with those who get addicted . If you get addicted to drugs you are more likely to do illegal things to fuel your addiction , stealing , etc. If it is well managed and the drug isn't illegal then there is no problem but considering the majority of drugs are illegal and people will do illegal to get more drugs the majority of the time it is very rare to have a well managed drug addiction .

Side: Against
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
2 points

Cold turkey and weaning are not the only possibilities. Your knowledge of pharmacology is too limited here, and it shows. Partial analogues are used very frequently. Consider nicotine addiction, and the drug varenicline (chantix), one current option used to treat it.

Varenicline works for two reasons.

1) It is a partial agonist of the receptors that nicotine binds to. This means that it has a significantly lessened effect on the brain as compared to nicotine, both in terms of objectively measured stimulation and subjectively described experiences.

2) It has a higher binding affinity for said receptors than nicotine does. This means that it binds to the receptors more readily and stays bound longer.

This effectively allows it to 'block' nicotine molecules from binding to the receptors, and the partial stimulation helps curb the withdrawal symptoms.

There are drugs like this for numerous addictive chemicals. Methadone stands out as one for heroin- it's not as effective as varenicline is for nicotine because it still has abusable effects, but it still has the function of providing a 'lesser' stimulation to the same receptors (as compared to heroin) while blocking morphine/heroin from bonding to the activated receptors.

Side: For
Elvira(3446) Clarified
1 point

The treatment would be tailored to suit them personally, and I don't think paying for their care is an issue.

Side: For
Debater345(170) Disputed
1 point

I said you tailor the treatment . What you failed to address the problems the treatments would cause . Also , the paying is an issue for those of us who don't wanna give our hard earned money to people who were dumb enough to get into drug use and then need us to pay for their treatment .

Side: Against

When people break the law in other ways such as cheating on our taxes, stealing from others, drunk driving, Jay walking, etc. etc. would you make the same mindless argument?

Liberals are mindless enough to find excuses for any crime. A Liberal could say if someone steals, they have issues brought on from their childhood. Drinking to drunkenness is a choice before you climb into that car. Liberals could say his drinking is an alcoholic disease(which they do say). It's not his fault they will say. Liberals are all about not being accountable for choices we make. Choosing to take that illegal drug the first time is a crime. You are not addicted at that point. You chose to break the law & the addiction was your choice. It is not medical problem. GET REAL!

Side: Against
Elvira(3446) Disputed
2 points

If there is a medical issue behind anything, it should be treated. Yes, if someone has committed actual harming-other-people crimes those should be punished accordingly; but if someone has simply got themselves addicted to a drug for some reason or the other, they should not be treated as criminals. (I don't think drugs should be against the law.) In the real world, nearly everyone has broken some law or the other. Because the law is not respected, people are inclined to break it. The law isn't 100% right. We still have those donkey laws in countries allover the world that no-one takes any notice of. The 'you broke the law' argument doesn't work because the law is invalid. It's not about what the law says is right, it's about what we think is right.

Side: For
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
1 point

What planet do you live on? Do you have any ideas the harm drugs do to families? The fathers that can't hold down a job because of his or her choosing to break our drug laws. Do you know how many kids are being raised by Government and foster homes because of drugs? GET REAL! THAT HARMS OTHER PEOPLE!

Side: Against
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

There is a difference between being responsible and being held to account. Punitive accountability is not always the most effective response, and limiting ourselves to that single response can cost us financially and socially.

Side: For