The Instigator
GarretKadeDupre
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
imabench
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Lee Harvey Oswald No-Scoped John F. Kennedy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+7
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...
GarretKadeDupre
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/10/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,944 times Debate No: 43728
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

GarretKadeDupre

Pro

Thanks in advance to imabench for accepting this debate (if he does so). There are absolutely no rules in this debate. I only ask that he refrain from trolling, since this is a very sensitive topic for a lot of people and it would hurt their feelings.

I will present my perfectly sound arguments and undeniable evidence in the 2nd round.

imabench

Con

I accept and will argue whatever I am supposed to be arguing.

I didnt really read the title of the debate before I accepted and started typing this though. Im assuming it has something to do with Obamacare or Wesley Snipes.

Just checked the title, its better than I thought >:)

State your case
Debate Round No. 1
GarretKadeDupre

Pro

Thanks to imachair for accepting my debate. I will now present my arguments for why I am certain Harvey Lee no-scoped JFK.

First, Harvey wasn't looking down the scope
How many times do snipers miss the first 2 shots?(1) Not often, unless either A: they suck at sniping or B: they weren't looking down the scope. Which is more likely in this case? Obviously not A, because just look at this dude, he's so pro:

Second, Harvey was a noob
Only noobs no-scope, because they suck at true sniping and life in general. Harvey was a total noob because he was killed by a pistol.(2) I can only imagine the satisfaction Jack got from pistoling this douche no-scoper. It was totally worth getting banned for life.(3)

Fifth, Harvey was a team-killer
Harvey was a classic team-killer. His clan [USA!] taught him how to be pro and pick up girls, but they wouldn't teach him to no-scope, because that's gay. Raging so hard, he accepted a clan invite from the Spetnaz(4) and changed his clan tag to [P1MP] which is really ironic. The Spetnaz learned him in the art of the most efficient way to waste your time, like no-scoping in private matches for 24 hours straight and loudly boasting that you screwed your opponent's mother. He came back to the [USA!] clan and somehow convinced his team to play a Hardcore: Search & Destroy match. That's when he teamkilled his clan leader, jfk35.

(1)http://www.aarclibrary.org...
(2)http://guernseys.com...
(3)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(4)http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
imabench

Con

"How many times do snipers miss the first 2 shots?"

Depends on how much your computer lags when youre playing Call of Duty.....




"just look at this dude, he's so pro: "

Are you kidding? He looks lie a guy you see in a newspaper in Florida as someone who was arrested for having sex with a cactus in the middle of an intersection.... And succeeded.




"Harvey was a total noob because he was killed by a pistol."

He literally had his hands handcuffed behind his back and being held by police officers, no matter how pro you are you cant escape that.




"His clan [USA!] taught him how to be pro and pick up girls"

Well they clearly failed at that last part.




"He came back to the [USA!] clan and somehow convinced his team to play a Hardcore: Search & Destroy match. That's when he teamkilled his clan leader, jfk35. "

What 'team'? Harvey was a one man job who killed jfk35 all on his own. He probably missed the first two shots due to the fact that jkf35 was in a moving car, and that he was lagging a tad.



Debate Round No. 2
GarretKadeDupre

Pro

Thanks for a quick response! On to my rebuttals...

There is no evidence that Harvey was using a computer when he quick-scoped JFK.

It was probably an Xbox because Xbox sucks.

Regarding your totally inappropriate comment about people who have sex with cactuses, I have to say your conclusion is unfounded. It takes a Pro to have a sex with a cactus in the middle of an intersection and succeed. So your own argument defeats itself.
  • "He literally had his hands handcuffed behind his back and being held by police officers, no matter how pro you are you cant escape that."
Oh yeah? Well when I was in headstart (pre-kindergarten) I had this guy called Harvey dress up as a rabbit and call himself Harvey Rabbit and do magic tricks. Harvey Oswald and this Harvey Rabbit are obviously the same person (they have the same name, duh) so Harvey should have just pulled a Houdini and got away from the cops.

But he's a noob quick-scoper who sucks at life, reaffirming the resolution.

Con says that the USA failed in teaching Harvey to pick up girls. I must point out that this is the fallacy of argument from ignorance: Just because we have not witnessed Harvey picking up girls does not mean that he didn't pick up thousands of girls.

In Con's last argument he contradicts himself: He originally said that Harvey missed because he was lagging, now he says it's because jfk35 was in a moving car.

Oh wait, never mind. He said "and that he was lagging a tad," so it's not technically a contradiction. But it seems like it at first glance so vote Pro! Thank you!
imabench

Con

1) He was Lagging

"There is no evidence that Harvey was using a computer when he quick-scoped JFK. It was probably an Xbox because Xbox sucks."

So we agree that he was lagging.




2) Handcuffed when shot

"Harvey Oswald and this Harvey Rabbit are obviously the same person (they have the same name, duh) so Harvey should have just pulled a Houdini and got away from the cops."

He wasnt just handcuffed though, he was being held by officers who were restraining both of his arms. Ive never seen Houdini escape THAT before, and I doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald was actually Houdini



"Just because we have not witnessed Harvey picking up girls does not mean that he didn't pick up thousands of girls."

HE WAS HAVING SEX WITH A CACTUS, I THINK THAT IMPLIES HE COULDNT PICK UP GIRLS



In conclusion, its highly likely that Oswald did NOT try to no-scope jfk35, and only missed the first two shots because jfk35 was in motion, and because Oswald was lagging due to his crappy xbox

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by TheAntidoter 3 years ago
TheAntidoter
Well i guess that works.
Posted by TheAntidoter 3 years ago
TheAntidoter
Well i guess that works.
Posted by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
"We on this site do not simply give "full points" to whom we like."

Cheetah likes me? O.o

I don't even know who that is
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
It took me a while to see it to until Ragnar spotted it.

Hey Anti, remove your vote Cheetahs vote was deleted
Posted by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
lol i didnt even know it was a joke until i read ur comment
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Stupidest bench joke I've ever heard too. Not even funny
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
@Cheetah: Please fix your vote. "I give Pro full points, sorry bench, at least you have girls sitting on you..." is insufficient for anything greater than arguments (and then only because this is a troll debate).

We on this site do not simply give "full points" to whom we like.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by MyDinosaurHands 3 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
GarretKadeDupreimabenchTied
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: Since this was a troll debate for the purpose of humor, I give argument points to the person who I thought was funniest. Ima was still funny, don't get me wrong, the cactus thing was good but I thought Pro kept the funnies throughout more consistently.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
GarretKadeDupreimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: "It takes a Pro to have a sex with a cactus in the middle of an intersection and succeed. So your own argument defeats itself." Great counter, however "Just because we have not witnessed Harvey picking up girls" was weak as a picture of his wife would have gone a long way. I loved the setup on this one, however con sealed the deal due to catching pro's accidental concession on points of lag. No scoping with the lag of an xbox then hitting after only three shots, he could not have been a noob. Therefore as it's agreed he was a noob, he must have used the scope. ... Sources to pro, for using enough properly relevant sources to the debate (a troll debate may have valid points in it, they highlight the satire nicely) which went uncontested.