The Instigator
bsh1
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
sayvillees
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

LIVE DEBATE: Qualified Immunity

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 1 vote the winner is...
bsh1
Voting Style: Judge Point System: Select Winner
Started: 7/13/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,219 times Debate No: 103184
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

bsh1

Con

Intro

Sayvillees accepted my open debate challenge to do a live debate and selected the Qualified Immunity topic and the Pro position. This means I will be arguing as a devil's advocate, which should be fun and entertaining. This is a live, Lincoln-Douglas-style debate, which makes it all the more exciting. This debate is scheduled to take place today (7/12/2017) around 11:45pm, EST.

Since not all judges are familiar with the LD format or with live debates in general, I have nominated some judges who I believe are more qualified than most to adjudicate this kind of round. Those judges are: whiteflame, Hayd, Tejretics, Warren42, Raisor, Thett3, Airmax1227, and bluesteel (since I've seen him online lately). If Pro objects to anyone on this list, or wishes to add names, Pro should contact me before accepting the challenge, and we can discuss the issue. Judges, if they accept, agree to adjudicate this debate impartially and without outside assistance; judges are, of course, free to decline their nominations. The voting period is 1 month with a select winner system.

Topic

The United States ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers

Terms

Limit - "to curtail or reduce in quantity or extent" (Merriam Webster)
Qualified Immunity - a legal doctrine which "protects government officials from lawsuits alleging that they violated plaintiffs' rights, only allowing suits where officials violated a 'clearly established' statutory or constitutional right. When determining whether or not a right was 'clearly established,' courts consider whether a hypothetical reasonable official would have known that the defendant's conduct violated the plaintiff's rights" (Cornell Law School). Additionally, qualified immunity is a pretrial defense which prevents discovery and prevents a case proceeding to trial.

Resolutional Interpretation

In order to prevent confusion regarding the meaning of this topic, which is admittedly worded in a less-than-clear way, my opponent and I have agreed on the following interpretation of the resolution: "to limit qualified immunity" means to reduce the extent of the protections police receive under QI doctrine; or, in other words, to make it easier to sue police. Pro will therefore argue for reducing the extent of available QI protections for police officers.

Rules

1. No "kritiks" (i.e. challenging the assumptions/premises of the resolution)
2. No "flex prep" (i.e. using prep time as CX time or vice versa)
3. No trolling or deliberately non-serious/humorous cases
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. Debaters accept the definitions and the resolutional interpretation given above; debaters may provide definitions for other terms within the debate as needed
6. Debaters must have, upon their opponent's request, citations or working URLs for their sources. Citations must contain roughly all that a regular MLA citation might. Citations or links can be exchanged in-between speeches (with no loss of prep) over DDO PMs, in the comments sections of this debate, through the G+ chat function, through email, or can be read out loud into the video.
7. The first round is for acceptance only
8. Violation of any of these rules, or of any of the R1 set-up, merits a loss

Non-Live Debate Structure

R1. Acceptance
R2. Con posts a Video-recording of the Live Debate; Pro posts "no round as agreed"

Live Debate Structure

6min - Aff Constructive (AC)
3 - Neg CX (1CX)
7 - Neg Constructive and First Rebuttal (NC/1NR)
3 - Aff CX (2CX)
4 - Aff First Rebuttal (1AR)
6 - Neg Second Rebuttal (2NR)
3 - Aff Second Rebuttal (2AR)

w/ 4 minutes of prep time each to use at their discretion

Thanks...

to Sayvillees for this debate; I am really looking forward to a great round of LD!
sayvillees

Pro

I accept this debate. I'm excited to get some summer practice for debate in, and if this goes well there will certainly be more debates between the two of us.
Debate Round No. 1
bsh1

Con

Here is the link to the round: https://www.youtube.com...

Because of mic issues, Sayvillees is going to post a link to his AC in R2. You should probably just skip to 1CX, which begins around: 11:30.
sayvillees

Pro

https://docs.google.com...

The strikethrough shouldn't be read, and the case that I read ends with the statement in bold.

It was a pleasure debating and this won't be the last time, bsh1!
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by tejretics 12 months ago
tejretics
I'll try to get a vote in tonight.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Thanks, guys!
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Thanks, guys!
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
I will get to this, though if I don't by the end of this week, send me a PM.
Posted by warren42 1 year ago
warren42
Please PM me or comment on my profile once this is ready to be judged.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
bsh1sayvillees
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: RFD given here: http://www.debate.org/forums/miscellaneous/topic/102703/