The debate on legalizing the recreational use drugs included four debaters, two of which argued to legalize drugs, while the other two argued against it. I felt that each speaker differed in character, opinion, speaking style, and even body language. I also felt that they all had very good points, however each of them had a different way of approaching the debate. I think that overall, Asa Hutchinson who argues again legalizing drugs did the best job at arguing and supporting his opinion in this debate.
The first speaker, Paul Butler based many of his points on his career as a prosecutor to argue for the legalization of drugs. Butler used real life scenarios and his own personal experiences to help explain his opinion on this debate, making his points easy to relate to. He …show more content…
Hutchinson used many personal experiences from being a government official and prosecutor to explain his opinion. He also made a very strong point when stating that legalizing the use of drugs will not decrease the use of drugs, only increase it tremendously. Hutchinson believes that there should be changes, however legalizing drugs is not the right answer and it will only increase the use of people using drugs across America. Hutchinson had great body language, such as moving his hands around and making eye contact, while also approaching this debate in a professional manner. The last debater, Theodore Dalrymple focused more on the medical aspect of this debate. While Dalrymple used more medical explanations than personal experiences, I felt that at times his debate was difficult to comprehend. I also noticed that he seemed more nervous than the other speakers, however he did move around more than they did. I agreed with his statement that legal drugs are becoming more addicting than illegal drugs and he did a great job at arguing his