Legalization Of Marijuana Analysis

On the topic of the “Legalization of Marijuana”, Marc Victor and Bill Montgomery presented a convoluted analysis. Based on an analysis of argument fallacies, Victor lost the debate by falling victim to false analogies, hasty generalizations, false dilemmas, and non-sequiturs. Victor’s unknowing use of argument fallacies underscored his credibility as an expert in the field, made him appear to be uneducated on the topic, and brought greater attention to the fact that his debate lacked substance. He continuously made assumption about Americans, had a general misunderstanding of the American political climate, and filled his argument with unrelated issues. This ballot will critically analyze the arguments of Victor and Montgomery and judge their

Victor’s first dilemma built off of his already established ignorance of the current political climate. He said, “it is impossible to live in the United States and not know what is going on” presenting to the audience that you either live in America and know what is going on our you do not live in America. However, Victor failed to acknowledge that many Americans live in this country not knowing the words to the Pledge of Allegiance. He falsely presented that all Americans must understand what is “going on” in order to live here. Which suggests that Victor has an uneducated and unrealistic view of the true political climate of the United

Victor’s unorganized argument for the legislation of marijuana caused him to use non-sequiturs. There were moments during the debate that I truly believe Victor forgot what he was supposed to be debating. Victor advocated for smaller government and an end to drone wars, two topics that had no direct bearing on the legalization of marijuana. When responding to Montgomery’s claim about the regulation of marijuana, Victor went into the freedoms, protections, and privacies that the government has stripped away from the American people. He went on to advocate for smaller government. Victor attempted to redefine the debate and narrow the discussion, which led to unrelated claims and arguments. Victor’s inability to focus his debate, led to numerous unrelated topics and attempts to connect the legalization of marijuana to topics he knew. This is supported by the focus that he put on the legalization of marijuana as the solution to drug wars and his advocacy for smaller