The Instigator
TerryEmeigh02
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Rawtheran
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Government Polocies/Laws For (Outer) Space

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 559 times Debate No: 75145
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

TerryEmeigh02

Con

I believe that there should be no rules for space. My perspective of this is that space, is not owned by a country, nor government. So, who is to say what we can or cannot do in space? If someone were to colonize Mars, for example, they'd more then likely begin a new government. Take for example, the USA. The U.S., was formed by Britain and other "colonizing countries." However, when they got here, they had no "rules" to abide by. They didn't have to buy plots of land, and they surely didn't have anyone enforcing these rules. As I was saying, the people in the U.S., eventually broke away from their "father" countries and formed their own. This is the same of what may happen to space. However, currently, who is to say (they) own space?
Rawtheran

Pro

I absolutely without a doubt believe that there should be rules, and regulations regarding space because if their aren't any rules or regulations then that means a country can do whatever it wants whenever it wants. such as deploying weapons in space violating, and threatening the sovereignty of other nations. Furthermore there would have to be some sort of international oversight in order for colonization of other worlds to become a reality, because there aren't any worlds in this solar system that can sustain human life like Earth can meaning the colony would have to depend on supplies. Also no single country on Earth could afford to establish a colony on another world so it would require international cooperation to fund such a project.
Debate Round No. 1
TerryEmeigh02

Con

My opponent talked about developing a weapon in space. This, is already against the law. According the U.S.'s law, space is an open frontier to those with "good means." This means, that they could not build a space weapon. Also, there are thousands of debris orbiting Earth. So, if someone was to build a weapon in space, it'd be extremely difficult, if it wasn't done by a machine/robot. The debris can travel 5-10km per hour. Now that might not seem like a lot, but if you got hit by a peice of metal, the size of a nickel, you'd surely wake up with a head ache the next morning. My opponent also stated that a country could not afford to send people to another planet to colonize. Space X, a private company, will have people on Mars by 2025.
Rawtheran

Pro

The con is stating that weapons in space are already against the law, and yet I find this untrue because according to this article http://www.slate.com... Not only are there no laws governing weapons in space, but it is actually a reality that nations can develop weapons in space which is why there absolutely need to be laws and regulations when it comes to space. My opponent also mentions how Space X is going to launch a mission to Mars, but I would counter that while it may be possible to put a man on Mars, it is not economically possible to colonize it as the Director of Nasa Sam Scimimie has stated.
Debate Round No. 2
TerryEmeigh02

Con

The pro, in this argument has clearly never heard of the "Outer Space Treaty" or "The Treaty on Priniciples Governing the Activites Of States In The Exploration And Use Of Outer Space, Including The Moon And Other Celestial Bodies." The treaty was originally formed around the U.S., UK, and the Soviet Union, but, the law expanded out to become the international law. The treaty/law, clearly states that the use of (outer) space or other celestial bodies for the purpose of launching or creating a weapon of mass destruction. (i.e. http://en.m.wikipedia.org...) Also, , my opponent stated that NASA wouldn't colonize on Mars. He doesn't understand this process however. In which, landing on Mars, is only the first step.
Rawtheran

Pro

Considering this is the final round I will say this has been a interesting debate, and I've enjoyed my opponents company. I've learned many things through this experience, and I hope he has too. Now my final arguments are that while the Outer Space Treaty prohibits the use of wmds It does not prohibit the use of conventional weapons which can still threaten the safety of other nations something that China has already demonstrated back in 2006 when thy proved they could blowup a satellite just with a surface to air missile. I would also like to remind my opponent that the Soviet Union had plans to colonize the moon, but failed at the cost of many lives. While it may be a great dream the technology, and funding for a colony isn't there.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by TerryEmeigh02 2 years ago
TerryEmeigh02
I know, it was just suppose to be short and sweet lol! It was my first argument, and I've learned a lot from you, we should have a debate again... Thank you
Posted by Rawtheran 2 years ago
Rawtheran
I have to admit this was a very nice debate, and the only complaint I have is that I was only limited to 1,000 characters lol Terry If we ever debate again or whenever you he a debate with someone else please allow both sides to use more than 1,000 charecters because It is not nearly enough for posting the arguments I feel both sides deserve to post. If anything we only wrote very condensed arguments. Also next time expand the debate for 5 rounds with maybe 1 for acceptance, 1 for opening argements, 2 for rebttals, and then 1 for closing arguements
Posted by Rawtheran 2 years ago
Rawtheran
I would say that this debate is based on an unrealistic scenario considering no country has nether the economy, resources, manpower, or even technology to colonize space
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs:
"Outer space is an exciting and highly important region, which because of its unique nature holds the potential for both significant benefits and dangers. The primary goals of space law are to ensure a rational, responsible approach to the exploration and use of outer space for the benefit and in the interests of all humankind."

There's your answer. It's not *owned* by any particular establishment, just a shared embodiment to fulfill and maintain the aforementioned goals. Without regulation, uncondoned destruction is highly plausible and easily facilitated.
No votes have been placed for this debate.