Resolved:Should Cyber bullying be a criminal Offence? (Serious/Prepared Debaters Only Please)
Debate Rounds (3)
I did not copy and paste this case, this is my actually case that I use in my debate class, which is why I'm only looking for serious debaters. This is actually my summed up case...
1)Cyberbullying has greatly decreased ever since the law was placed, for example. Just a fact, the first cyber bullying law was place in North Carolina in 2009, and has been placed in most states or in the process. According to the National
Crime Prevention Council, in 2004, 40.8 percent of children were being cyber bullying and in 2009 it was stated to be "well over 40%" now in 2010 the percentage has dropped to 20.8 percent, ONLY 1 year after
the law was placed. Cyber bullying has decreased more in one year than it has in the last 10 years.
2) Cyber bullying is on the rise. Technology/social networking has increased with in
the last 50 years because of this technological era. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noticed a rise in cyber bullying. In 2000, only nine percent of kids ages 10 to 17 experienced this type of bullying. The percentage has now reached 50 percent for 2008. This means that before the first law of cyber bullying was passed in 2009, counseling, programs, and other efforts were not working at all. According to BBC news, Childlike staff in Nottingham said new technology had dramatically increased their workload. The charity receives about 4,500 calls a day nationally and about a quarter of these come from victims of bullying.
3) Our first reason, the negative impact of cyber bullying. Statistics and professionals have shown that this has been an increasing danger for our kids. According to cyberbullying.com "….Most victims suffer shame, embarrassment, anger, depression and withdrawal." Cyber bullying is taking our kids from their normal beings to replace them with humans full of depression and anger and constant cyber bullying. Is this something that deserves to be bypassed? study from Turku University showed that teenagers who faced cyber bullying in their daily lives would have an increased chance of suffering from several headaches, sleeping problems, and possibly increased stress. This type of treatment is putting our children of our world to a lower level and morale and it will decrease there values on their life.
Thank you, and please vote Pro.
Here is the format-
I accept this debate.
Cyberbullying. We are all awere of it. But what exactly is cyberbullying and more importanlty, should it be considered a criminal offence. I presonaly negate the resolution, RESOLVED: Should Cyberbullying be a criminal offence.
Contention 1: Most Cases of Cyberbullying are not to be considered criminal offences.
Cyberbullying may be a problem. A problem we can all concede to. But, i say that in no way should a simple act of cyberbullying be considered a crime. The vast majority of cyberbullying incidents can and should be handled informally: with parents, schools, and others working together to address the problem before it rises to the level of a violation of criminal law(1). One should not take the problem too far, or else the lid could explode. For a criminal offence to occur there must be two main elements - the prohibited conduct and the mental element of a guilty mind or intention. Unless an offence falls into the unusual category of a strict liabilityoffence, the prosecution must, in order to prove that a person has committed an offence, show that both these elements were present(2). Thus, one can now begin to see that in order for Cyberbullying to be considered a crime, it would have to fall under the categories above. In many instances, the cases do NOT fall under the categories. If prosecutors can’t find anything to charge a particular cyberbully with, that bully has not committed a crime. If simply being a jerk was a criminal offense, we would need many more prisons than the hundreds we already have(6). There is no way one can say that Cyberbullying should be considered a crime. Furthermore, one can see that the penalty for a small infraction such as just taunting a person online is too severe.
Contention 2: Cyberbullying is decresing, contrary to what one may beliveve.
As a young adult living in todays society composed of computers and smart phones, i am very aware of the problems that such things pose. But, i am also aware that as one enters the stage of young adult, one tends to mature more. Cyberbullying is seen as a very immature and stupid act amongst my peers and myself. We MAY tend to judge people according to their clothes,race etc. but we never go beyond that. Now when I say "WE", I mean all of the 21st century teens around me. Moving on, a study published last month in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found that the percentage of youth (of 12 to 17 years old) reporting physical bullying in the past year went down from 22 percent in 2003 to 15 percent in 2008(3). Furthermore, A national study commissioned by the Girl Scouts came to a similar conclusion. Young people are actually more responsible, more involved in their community, and more tolerant of diversity than they were 20 years ago. The survey found that 84 percent of youth said they wouldn't forward an embarrassing e-mail about someone else(4). One can now begin to see that cyberbullying is decreasing due to the fact that Many young people want no part of bullying and consider it reprehensible behavior(4). Thus, i belive that making Cyberbullying a crime would be a waste of time,due to the fact that Cyberbullying is decreasing.
Contention 3: Making Cyberbullying a criminal offence would be loaded with trouble.
Now, when I say TROUBLE, i mean legal problems. Implementing cyberbullying as a criminal offence would prove to be a disastrous event and a big waste of time. First of all, making cyberbullying a criminal offence would go directly against the First Amendment of the Constitution wich reads "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"(5). A person has a right (given to him or her by the constitution) to post whatever he wishes to post online. If he or she wants to make a comment about a person, be it the president or his or her peer, they have a right to do it. The Constitution grants such a freedom, so why not exersice it?
Furthermore, how can one prove that the cyberbullying is being aimed at a said victim because the said victim taunted the offender in the past? How can one prove that the said offender did not aim to harm the said victim and was only playing around with him or her? When people are punished, it should be for the harm that they intend to do. If a bully crosses the line between freedom of speech, and invasion of privacy, or harassment, those are the crimes he should be charged with, as is happening in the cases currently in the news(6). No person should be considered a criminal just because he exersised his freedom of speech. Plus, if it continualy nags at the victim, why does the vicim just walk away form the computer? There is absouloutley nothing stopping a said victim from walking to his parents and telling them what is occuring. In many cases, the victim of cyberbullying decides to take the verbal beating, as opposed to just simply SHUTTING THE COMPUTER SCREEN. One needs to take these things into consideration into hand before pointing the fingers.
Cyberbullying may be a vast problem, but that does not mean that it should be made a criminal offence. When a person is being cyberbullied, he or she must deal with the problem as they seem fit. An offence , yes. A crime,no.
Thus, i urge the voter to stand beside me in this resolution. Thank you for even taking the time to read my case. Have a great day.
My opponent's first reason is "Most Cases of Cyberbullying are not to be considered criminal offences." This is one that I do not agree with for multiple outstanding reasons. He suggests that we should CONTINUE to use parents, schools, and others working together to address the problem. This is something that according to my research by the Nation Crime Prevention Council that the amount of cyber bullying victims and the amount of people using methods such as cyber bullying had stayed STABLE and actually increased a little bit until BEFORE the first law was passed in North Carolina. It then dropped to 20.8 percent which cut almost exactly in half. As you can see, my opponent lacks the ability to understand that cyber bullying has DECREASED in America and continues to do so, while his methods have failed to help the unfortunate victims of Cyber Bullying today.
My opponent's second is "Cyberbullying is decresing, contrary to what one may beliveve." He believes that cyber bullying has been decreasing although it has NOT. Teenagers of America and of the United States CONTINUE to be disobedient and continue to lack the understanding that cyber bullying can lead to such horrible outcomes for the victim. Methods such as counseling, teaching, and prevention programs have FAILED to work and decrease Cyber Bullying. As Cyber Bullying continues to rise due to today's technological era; we must put a stop to it. Using Girl Scouts is not a reliable comparison as you are using children of too young of an age; we must include the rest of the teenage population of America or else the comparison will become invalid. Also, my opponent uses a source Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine stating that PHYSICAL BULLYING (Note: PHYSICAL) has decreases. Today we are NOT debating whether Physical Bullying shall be a law, we although ARE debating whether cyber bullying is a law. Physical Bullying is a type of bullying which is used directly while cyber bullying is a type of bullying that is used INDIRECTLY, so there is no possible way you can put theses two topics together.
My opponent's third reason is "Making Cyberbullying a criminal offence would be loaded with trouble." He often refers to cyber bullying being defended by the First Amendment's Freedom of Speech. Cyber Bullying is NOT defended by the first amendment. Freedom of Speech only pertains to the government not being able to punish you for what you say. It is used to protect the citizens from the government. It doesn't apply to private citizens saying anything against another private citizen. As a citizen of the United States you are not allowed to slander people and say harmful thing toward someone, as this then destroys your freedom of speech.
An extra point I would like to bring up is DEFAMATION. Defamation is basically when you spread false rumors about someone; a basic concept in cyber bullying. Often, cyber bullying defendants are often prosecuted for defamation. You are unauthorized to spread false and untrue statements about another human. If so you are able to be prosecuted which is something most cyber bullying cases are counted for.
Thank you, please vote PRO.
I shall begin by attacking my opponents case, then i shall go on to defend my case.
Opponent point 1: To start, i would like to point out that my opponent is acctualy GOING AGAINST HIMSELF in saying that Cyberbullying has been decreasing. If Cyberbullying is decreasing, there is no need to acctualy make it a criminal offence. In just a few words, i have voided my opponents first point. Another question, what law is my opponent refering too in his first point? There are various laws, but wich one is he speaking about? Furthermore, my opponent continues on to say that "Cyber bullying has decreased more in one year than it has in the last 10 years" and he claims that the said law was the one that helped do that. But i say that because that law is already in place, there is no need to intrude upon the effects of the said law by making cyberbullying a crime. If the law is SO helpful, why not let IT deal with Cyberbullying?
Opponent point 2: I shall begin by pointing out that my opponet actualy CONTRADICTS his first point, therfore making both points invalid. I shall continue nontheless. I would like my opponent to cite the source of the website or study where he stated that "The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noticed a rise in cyber bullying"( if possible please).
" According to BBC news, Childlike staff in Nottingham said new technology had dramatically increased their workload. The charity receives about 4,500 calls a day nationally and about a quarter of these come from victims of bullying." These two sentences make almost no sense to me. First, my opponent is talking about Childlike staff. What is Childlike staff? Is that like child labor? Then he says something about Nottingham. Even later, he goes on to talk about a charity. What charity? I do hope that my opponent knows that he did not name the said charity. In the last sentence, he also talks about 4,500 calls concerning bullying. First of all, where are these calls heading too? Second of all, my opponent made a grave mistake in saying "Bullying" instead of Cyberbullying. For all we know, those 4,500 calls could have been about bullying at school, not Cyberbullying. Thus, this argument is invalid due to the fact that it has nothing to do with Cyberbullying. Not only that, but my opponent provides no source.
Opponent Contention 3: My opponent revolves this contention around the fact that cyberbullying is negative."Most victims suffer shame, embarrassment, anger, depression and withdrawal." I belive that the victims that my opponent is speaking about, chose to suffer from all these things. As stated in my 3rd contention, it is very simple to just close the computer and walk away. Those that stay behind the computer screen chose to do so. No one is stoping them from getting help.
"Is this something that deserves to be bypassed?"
I belive that my opponent strongly goes against himself by saying this. According to him, there are laws that do not allow these things to happen. Because something is not called a crime, it does not mean it will be bypassed. So if my opponent agrees that there are laws in place that help stop Cyberbullying, then it is in fact not being bypassed. Furthermore, my opponent gives a very vauge peice of evidence. There is no website called Cyberbullying.com. If the voter does not belive me, all he or she simply has to do is type in "cyberbullying.com". No website under that specific name appears. Cyberbullying.org does appear, but my opponent clrearly stated cyberbullying.com as his source. Thus, his whole argument has just been proven void. Whats more, my opponent yet again gives a very vauge source in his second to last sentence. Where exactly did this Turku University study come from? My opponent gives no source for the said study, therfore one can belive that the study is fake.
Now, I shall continue by defening my case.
My opponent yet again brings in the arugent about the fact that cyberbullying is decreasing. I belive we have established that. What's more, he gives yet ANOTHER vauge peice of evidence. Where exactly did he get his reaserch from the Nation Crime Prevention Council? Only he knows. He then continues on to attack me for reasons not icluded in my first conteniton. The deacresment of cyberbullying is strictly tied to my SECOND contention and not my FIRST contention, therfore, one can agree that my opponent has attaked the wrong contention.
My opponent YET AGAIN contraditcts himself by saying that Cyberbullying has NOT decreased, contrary to what he would have us belive in his first contention. Furthermore,he says that "Methods such as counseling, teaching, and prevention programs have FAILED to work and decrease Cyber Bullying." There is no way my opponent has proved what he said in the last sentence. He is not using solid evidence to back that arument up.
"Using Girl Scouts is not a reliable comparison as you are using children of too young of an age; we must include the rest of the teenage population of America or else the comparison will become invalid."
To counter what my opponent has stated, i say that he should realize that girl scouts range from ages of 5 years of age, to 18 years of age . Therfore, if a teen is considered anyone after 13, then it is safe to say that the girl scout study i provided is in fact very reliable.
"Also, my opponent uses a source Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine stating that PHYSICAL BULLYING (Note: PHYSICAL) has decreases" Take in consideration, my friends, that somtimes Cyberbullying may lead to phisical abuse. If a bully says on the web " i am going to beat you up because your ugly" to a victim, one can see that the cyberbullying and bullying have a correlation. The next day, the victim could be cornered by the bully and beaten.
" CyberBullying is NOT defended by the first amendment."
And why is it not? A person has a freedom of press as well, and putting something on the internet about someone or a group of people is basicly tied to the press, because they are reporting facts about that said someone. Therfoere, if cyberbullying were to be made a criminal offence, ones freedom of speech and of the press would be striped.
I am running out of characters so i shall close. In summation, my opponetns case seems very vauge due to the lack of tangible evidence. Thank you for reading my rebuttal.
ProAlex forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.