Police should be charged with murder if they kill anyone, including criminals.
Debate Rounds (3)
There are many cases of Officers killing the elderly, young children and people who couldn't even begin to defend themselves and getting away with it because of claims that they felt threatened by the individual. Yet if an individual (Non officer) feels threatened by an Officer, they are not afforded the same privilege.
Police Officers are known to use excessive force. There is no reason in the world that an adult should ever have to slam, taze, or shoot somebody incapable of defending themselves. If the Officer can not subdue a child, the elderly, or somebody who is mentally Ill without causing extreme harm, They are not fit to be an officer of the law.
In the case of somebody actually posing a threat to the officer, I believe that Mace (Pepper Spray) should ALWAYS be used as a first resort before a firearm is ever drawn.
Police training should be to disable and disarm, not to kill. Police are trained to shoot to the chest and head, this is the absolute opposite of what they should be trained to do.
The ONLY time a Police Officer should EVER use a firearm is if it is in defense of somebody else also using a firearm. It should not be waved around as a tool of fear.
Tazers are dangerous and in some cases deadly to the individual they are used on. Police are wrongly taught that a Tazer is an acceptable nonlethal weapon to use on anybody regardless of age or health and this isnt true. There have been accounts of Police tazing people with health conditions and killing them, or people who were wet (causing the shock to intensify and cause burns)
If a Police Officer cannot do his duty as peacefully as possible he is not fit to secure our streets. I believe that if Officers were told upfront they would be charged for 'crimes committed during the act of preventing other crime' Police brutality would immediately drop.
It will be Con's case to justify Police not getting prison time for the death of criminals (or anyone.)
TheGregzilla forfeited this round.
TheGregzilla forfeited this round.
The resolution is as follows
" Police should be charged with murder if they kill anyone, including criminals. "
This is essentially saying that anyone including police officers should be charged with murder even in the act of self defense. That is a horrible stance to take and one that should never be considered.
Even in criminology and law there is something that is called "the right to self defense".
"The right of self-defense (according to U.S. law) (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in violence for the sake of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including the use of deadly force." 
There is even something called Justifiable homicide
Justifiable Homicide - a killing without evil or criminal intent, for which there can be no blame, such as self-defense to protect oneself or to protect another, or the shooting by a law enforcement officer in fulfilling his/her duties. This is not to be confused with a crime of passion or claim of diminished capacity which refer to defenses aimed at reducing the penalty or degree of crime. 
Even under most state statues we are allotted the stand your ground law.
Stand your ground law - (1)Q95;A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if: (extended in source) 
We are allotted these rights to be able to defend ourselves from people and government alike. A police officers primary duty is to protect and uphold the peace. Some civilians can not defend themselves and police are afforded to make use of excessive violence in dire situations. If a robber has someone hostage, or if someone is breaking and entering and they have no intent on going to jail and are not afraid to kill there has to be a scapegoat to help the people that are in harms way. Police should be afforded the right to kill in dire situations and are promised so by the right to self defense and certain state statues.
Therefore the resolution is false.
I would have went may more in depth but see no reason to , due to multiple FFS.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dtaylor971 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture by the side of pro gives all seven points to con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.