The Instigator
merlinator
Con (against)
Tied
14 Points
The Contender
rougeagent21
Pro (for)
Tied
14 Points

New LD Topic need help

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 4 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,753 times Debate No: 7103
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (13)
Votes (4)

 

merlinator

Con

I have a practice region meet this weekend i was wondering if anyone could help meet hammer out the holes in my cases.
Observation 1.
We can safely assume vigilantes are not enforcing the written criminal law because obviously they do not act according to what the law dictates. Therefore we can assume that Vigilantes are enforcing a culturally held moral law, and punish deviance from such laws.
V: Preservation of Human life. We need to keep humans alive to continue our existence. This means that we need to avoid actions that take human lives.
VC: ???
…..Contention 1…..
The government must maintain its monopoly on violence. Max Weber defined a state as an authority having the monopoly of the legitimate means of organized violence within defined territorial boundaries (see Weber's Thesis). It is essential to the legitimacy of the state that this monopoly on violence be maintained. Max Weber goes on to say
"'Every state is founded on force. That is indeed right. If no social institutions existed which knew the use of violence, then the concept of 'state' would be eliminated, and a condition would emerge that could be designated as 'anarchy.'
It would be better for a government to be highly ineffective at enforcing law then it would be to not maintain its monopoly. The view of a government monopoly being necessary is not unique to Weber. Thomas Hobbes in his work The Leviathan also illustrates this idea.
"For the laws of nature, as justice, equity, modesty, mercy, and, in sum, doing to others as we would be done to, of themselves, without the terror of some power to cause them to be observed, are contrary to our natural passions, that carry us to partiality, pride, revenge, and the like. And covenants, without the sword, are but words and of no strength to secure a man at all. Therefore, notwithstanding the laws of nature, if there be no power erected…, every man will and may lawfully rely on his own strength and art for caution against all other men."
If government does not maintain a monopoly on violence there will be nothing to hold society together. Private individuals or groups will inevitably arm themselves and enact violence on each other. In almost every situation where the government has not maintained a monopoly on violence, violence against innocents, the government, and others has ensued. For this reason vigilantism is illegal. If we allow vigilantism to happen, then the government will lose its monopoly and society will degrade back to a state of nature, or as Thomas Hobbes put it life will become "poor, nasty, brutish, and short," and human life will not be upheld.
…..Contention 2…..
Vigilantism does not allow the government to maintain a monopoly on force. If vigilante action is pursued then the state loses its monopoly on force. This is bad because it leads anarchy and causes more violence and thus does not preserve human life.
rougeagent21

Pro

OK, lets get started.

So, I'll start with your observation.
First, you must define "the written criminal law." Second, you must show later on in your case how vigilantes are relative to this topic. (I will address this later) Lastly, you agreed in the end of your observation that vigilantes are acting upon moral law, and are just. This is contradictory to your case later on.

Ah, the core value. Preservation of human life. Great. However, you MUST SHOW how this can only be achieved through the negative side. It would be very easy for the affirmative to show how adhering to an international court
DOES preserve human life.

Value criterion?

Contention 1- Government's monopoly on violence. You bring up vigilantes quite often. You actually end up contradicting yourself here. You now say that we cannot allow for vigilantes, contradictory to your observation.
Also, show how this applies to the resolution?

Contention 2- Violation of the monopoly. This is essentially your first contention all over again. Try to find some other points to use.

Conclusion.
I don't think that once throughout the entire debate did you mention an international court. This is a BIG problem. Your case seems a little irrelevant. Try to make it correlate with the resolution more. Make sure to get a criterion. Also, show how your value CAN ONLY BE UPHELD THROUGH THE NEGATIVE. If you don't do this, the affirmative quickly will to their own case. I hope this helps. Good luck at your meet!
Debate Round No. 1
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
Awesome man! What region are you in again?
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
I'm going in USX
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
I just debated this topic at Nat quals. It turned out to be pretty fun! I ended up getting third, so I missed going to nationals by one place. How did everyone else do?
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
which is cheap...
Posted by TheRaven 7 years ago
TheRaven
It's all total, used at the users decision. However there are exceptions, such as Yale where there was 5 min prep for all. Usually they also give novices and JV'ers a min or two more than varsity.
Posted by Epicism 7 years ago
Epicism
Like 3 minutes between each speech or 3 total?
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
3 minutes each, but nfl rules are 4. we dont usually do that though.
Posted by Epicism 8 years ago
Epicism
Wow that's more random than ours;
AFF 8
Neg 3cx
Neg 8
AFF 3cx
AFF 8
Neg 3cx
Neg 8
Neg 5
Aff 5
Neg 5
Aff 5

What about prep time?
Posted by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
AFF-6minutes
NEG-3 cx
NEG-7minutes
AFF-3 cx
AFF-4minutes
NEG-6minutes
AFF-3minutes
Posted by Epicism 8 years ago
Epicism
I might do LD a few tournaments next year, but I don't really like the topic... And I don't know much about the structure lol I'm just a straight up policy debater.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Epicism 7 years ago
Epicism
merlinatorrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by merlinator 8 years ago
merlinator
merlinatorrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by vorxxox 8 years ago
vorxxox
merlinatorrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
merlinatorrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07