Marijuana Legislation

Sir, Ignorance is not an excuse ok. The fact that you could not find this video 'www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wi1GkbmU4E' which backs my proposition to legalise Marijuana as a regulated system because the current approach is not effective. So being stubborn will not benefit you. You will effectively loose at least half of the debate by not responding to this. So please watch as it is a major role in my argument. http://www.youtube.com...The fact that I contradicted myself by mistake on one instance does not automatically dismiss my whole argument and make it invalid as you are under the impression that kids are going to consume '80 page notebooks' to not even get a slight high is ridiculous at this idea. This is because it is once again factually incorrect of you and no I did not even suggest it - so what are you talking about..As for the second video, it is a news clip saying that 82% of American's of the National Telephone Survey believe they've lost the war on drugs, 12% aren't sure and just 7% said they think they're winning it. So it was just one source I refered to to back my claim which you refused under the explanation of 'Pro may believe that we have lost the war on drugs but we haven't stopped fighting, if we did this we would be surrendering. We would make it more easy for drug dealers to grow marijuana, and sell it!' which is absolutely absurd. We wouldn't make it more easy for drug dealers to grow marijuana, and sell it. This would mean the exact opposite that abolishing the drug trade on marijauna because it puts them out of businness they will loose their customers because people dont want to buy dodgy untrusted product when they can buy a safe, legal alternate. Reminder: I am proposing a strict regulated distribution similar to tobacco and alcohol.'I would like to thank pro for winning this debate for me.' you haven't one anything so don't get cocky because you honestly make that ridiculous arrogant claim based on the fact that I made one error in my writing as if to say you haven't made any mistakes. Well, that will show the audience just what a miserable b*tch you are.He makes some ridiculous case unrelated to the actual main argument of the debate because he cannot face the truth and the fact that marijuana regulated legalisation would be a better option that current laws for the benefitial reason's that I have outlined which he did not argue against so he's effectively lost half of the debate already as he only found reasons against Hemp (50% of the case). Let alone did he match the number of points in that let alone his weak opinions not backed up intially wth evidence of such. Everything he has written so far is therefore counted as his opinion and cannot be claimed as fact until evidence is provided in his points. Therefore invalid in a debate such as this. This is an actual quote from my opponent. 'Vote con, he refutes himself if you read his arguments' Here Con, is referring to himself 'he' in this sentence. Proof of a mistake in his writing just like I did. This makes him a hypocrite and shows exactly why his arrogance is nothing to be fooled by.Con has not been willing to co-operative in what I thought would be a 'productive debate' at all because he has simply whinged about small unnecessary gaps and not produced a substancial argument. Please vote Pro even if you're not in favour of the bill, I had more reliable sources, conduct, convincing arguments. I also had much, much more points to contribute to my side and have met my burden of proof, which Con's seems to think I haven't.