The Instigator
sunny.pujari
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
joung3010
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Government Surveillance?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
sunny.pujari
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/9/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,046 times Debate No: 38558
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

sunny.pujari

Con

Okay so I think the government needs to stop spying on people. I just want to hear from others how they think this may be good for our country.
joung3010

Pro

In England and America nothing is private, the threats are too real for anyone to be allowed privacy online or in public. If they had recorded the terrorists getting on the planes before 9/11 they could have tracked vehicles and found bin laden sooner.
Debate Round No. 1
sunny.pujari

Con

Hi,

Okay so what I want to state is that fear is what is driving people to agreeing to government surveillance. I believe that we should ignore that fear and start thinking about this from a different perspective. Have we really had any major threats lately? Haven't we convicted innocent people for being a suspected terrorist? Is all of this not going against Habeus Corpus? Is this not a clear violation of the constitution? I want to see the government to be able to keep the USA safe and secure from terror attacks and any other form of terrorism without the violation of all our rights as US citizens.
joung3010

Pro

Okay so the reason that we haven't heard about the terrorist threats are because they get picked up so often and are so quickly dealt with that there is no point telling anyone. Also its not just fear I'm okay with the government spying on us because I don't have anything to hide. If you wouldn't want a random stranger, someone that will never meet you, to see what your doing, then you shouldn't be doing it.
Debate Round No. 2
sunny.pujari

Con

No denial that we shouldn't feel uncomfortable with someone watching us in order for us to be safe, but I want to point out that this is going against the constitution and is a huge violation of it. Also I know from personal experience that many times the wrong people are convicted of being a terrorist. I am an Indian and I was going from NY to Atlanta and while going through airport security I got pulled over and patted down and questioned when the issue was caused by a stupid quarter that got stuck in my pant pocket. Its just plain unconstitutional to do what the government is doing.
joung3010

Pro

joung3010 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
sunny.pujari

Con

Okay then? I will continue to let you know that the excessive surveillance of all US residents is unfair and a clear violation of the constitution. I would prefer if the US gave each citizen a little more privacy and instead of violating set rules, give us those rights.
joung3010

Pro

joung3010 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
sunny.pujari

Con

I believe I win this one I guess? Great debating with you I suppose.
joung3010

Pro

joung3010 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
sunny.pujarijoung3010Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited, so conduct to Con. There were no solid arguments made by either side. Pro did mention "no need to fear" but the lack of depth that they went into it means that little depth was required for refutation. Con brought up the constitution, but since the debate was about what is good for the country, not what is constitutionally legal. While I cannot reward the use of a fallacy, I cannot penalize since Pro didn't catch it.
Vote Placed by HeartOfGod 3 years ago
HeartOfGod
sunny.pujarijoung3010Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: joung3010 forfeited twice, that seems like a pretty clear concession to me. This could have been a decent debate too