The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

On balance, domestic surveillance control by the US government is beneficial to US interests.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
JenniferASun has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/22/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 weeks ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 97 times Debate No: 95564
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




All I must prove for this argument is that the Domestic Surveillance we have today is more beneficial than getting rid of domestic surveillance in the United States. I also provide the following definition. Domestic Surveillance is any type of surveillance conducted by the United States, including but not limited to CCTV cameras, investigating foreign affairs, and electrical investigations.
domestic surveillance is beneficial to the country as a whole because it will hold criminals more accountable for their actions and give us more evidence to go off to catch the criminal. In the New York Times it says Quote, "In the case of Mr. Martin, an unarmed black teenager who was fatally shot by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, the most crucial evidence about how an alteration between the two began, one that ultimately led to Mr. Martin's death came down to Mr. Zimmerman's word.". In this case there was no domestic surveillance and all the evidence they went off of was Zimmerman's words and a few witnesses. So Mr. Zimmerman was found not guilty but if we had had used Domestic surveillance maybe it would have shown us a more accurate outcome of the crime. Also by the Domestic Surveillance Directorate "In the past, domestic law enforcement agencies collected data AFTER a suspect had been identified. This often resulted in lost intelligence and missed opportunities.". By lost intelligence and missed opportunities I mean if we have gained this surveillance sooner then it would may have led us to identifications to new targets and for the more serious crimes that could maybe even help save lives.


I accept. All I have to do is proves that surveillance is unconstitutional, and leads to a prolific expansion of government.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Swimwithcats 1 month ago
In light of our political situation I ask you to clarify;

Does this imply such powers granted by the patriot act as surveillance without a warrant, or is this a general definition of surveillance. It is hard to find those that think surveillance in general is a bad thing, but you will find more willing opponents such as myself if you were to make the issue about unwarranted mass surveillance such as the activities of the NSA.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.