The Instigator
ZaPH
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
WriterSelbe
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Schools should be Stricter

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
ZaPH
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/13/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,613 times Debate No: 28182
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

ZaPH

Pro

I believe schools should be stricter because kids nowadays have no manners at all. I recently went to my younger brothers elementary school and heard kids running down the hall way, cussing at each other. My brother has also been in situations when he went to the restroom, and when he came back to the class, his belongings were stolen from his desk.

My other brother has been getting bullied numerously with others just laughing at him, to the point where he has to take online school. He has told us about a kid getting in 5 fights already, and he still hasn't been expelled.

I've also heard of instances where kids have stolen things from the book fair, rapes, fights, and heavy bullying.
WriterSelbe

Con

I accept this debate as con to the topic, Resolved: Schools should be stricter.

The first argument my opponent presents pertains to the manners of students within schools nowadays.

In response to his arguments of having witnessed cursing and things being stolen, we have to look at responsibility here. Schools aren't held liable for the behavior of their students in the real world, and schools don't nurture the kids and provide them with moral standards from the beginning of the childrens' growth. These values are given by the parents. No matter what a school thinks of the behavior of a student, they cannot change it unless the behavior is targeted at the root. Parents are held accountable for the actions of their children. It isn't a school's job to be held liable for the behavior of its students, because schools are institutes for teaching.

It is not the vocation of the school or its staff to discipline students just as it is not the job of a bystander on the street to attempt to put out a fire in situations of arson or fire. It is the job of another, and in this case, the job is that of the parent. Asking schools to enforce harder punishment upon students is asking too much of them, as their main goal is to teach the students. They can't be held for anything their students do; only the parents can be.

As for people fighting and not getting expelled, we cannot know if the school was informed of this. The thing is, many times fights will not be reported to the school and the officials and schoolboard will not know of it. How can a schoolboard handle this? Also, it is sometimes not legal for a school system to actually expell a child. More often than not, that luxury is only available to private schools. Many schools can't even give detention. Any legal issues, like the rapes, stealing, fights, etc, are matters for the police, and not for a school system.

In conclusion, we cannot expect schools to be stricter for the following reasons. That: (1) Parents are responsible for the institution of values in their children and for their behavior and conduct, (2) Schools often don't know of problems with students, (3) Many schools can't legally enact punishment for offenses of students like expulsion or detentions, and (4) Issues with questionable legality are the responsibility of the police, not the school.

For these reasons, the ballot leans toward the con.
Debate Round No. 1
ZaPH

Pro

Parents SHOULD be held liable for controlling their kids, I agree. However, when children are on school property, any actions that the children do should be in the schools` hands. If the parents aren't willing to properly discipline their children, somebody has to, and that's when the school should step in. When parents drop their children off to the school, they expect their teachers to substitute for them as a chaperone. It is the teachers and schools responsibility to watch over children and input disciplinary actions. If it were the parents responsibility for their children (while at school), then I suggest parents should be next to their kid at all times, since nobody is there to care for them.

When you say a school is an institute for teaching, think about behavioral issues. The school should "teach" children how to behave. If schools are for learning, let children learn how to act socially and learn manners. In response to your comparison when you gave an example about a bystander and a fire, if the bystander sees the fire and keeps on walking, how will the police or fire department ever know? The bystander should call the police and inform them of the information. Same goes with the school.

For fights and rapes, there should be more teachers on patrol watching the children at recess. A school should serve as a future reference to the real world. When you get in a fight, you go to jail. When somebody gets in a fight at school, they should be put in detention, or be suspended.
WriterSelbe

Con

Pertaining to his arguments that if parents were to be liable for their kid's actions during school, they'd be over them at all times, society doesn't function that way. A person is held accountable for the actions of their pet(s), and no one is with their pet 24/7. It is the responsibility of the owner, or in this case, a parent, to teach the pet (kid) how to behave in the world and to keep the pet on the proper leash. If a pet destroys another person's property, it is the responsibility of the owner to repair and restore the property. The legal system is essentially based on children being extensions of their parents. School systems are not the ones with legal authority and responsibility over the kids when other kids are harrassing them or misbehaving. Legal offenses are handled in the criminal justice system.

When my opponent says that schools should teach children to behave, he is not entirely in opposition to my case. Yes, schools can have a part in teaching children to behave. However, resolutionally, it is not compliant or relevant. The resolution asks for enforcement of punishment and policy, not just for teaching, which isn't the responsibility of the school. A school's function within society is to teach, and the criminal justice system's responsibility is to punish those committing criminal offenses.

And my opponent then talks about the person in my analogy who we did not expect to risk his life to save someone from fire when that was not their function in society. My opponent says the person should call the police, a point I stressed in my initial case, that it is the responsibility of the police to handle criminal offenses, not the school. This strengthens my case, as it shows that the responsibility falls on police to handle situations as severe as my opponent cited.

Finally, my opponent provides that there should be more teachers on patrol at recess and more supervision to prevent rapes and fights. Then my opponent goes on to say that in the real world, when you get in a fight, you go to jail. The same thing should happen in a school as well. Just because it happens in a school doesn't make it exempt from societal punishments and standards, and those sorts of things are handled by the police.

This is why I conclude this argument with the statement that it is not the responsibility of the schools to enforce severe punishment.

Debate Round No. 2
ZaPH

Pro

What did you just say about me? I"ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I"ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I"m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fvck out. I have precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my words. You think you can get away with saying that sh1t to me over the Internet? Think again, fvcker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. Youre fvcking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and thats just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable @ss off the face of the continent, you little sh1t. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fvcking tongue. But you couldn't, and now you're paying the price, you g0d@mn idiot. I will sh1t fury all over you and you will drown in it. Youre fvking dead, kiddo.
WriterSelbe

Con

My opponent did not attack any of my arguments in his previous speech, so you can extend them. Also, I have no idea what he is talking about as I made no move to insult him in my previous speech, so conduct points can go to me. I was threatened with death without warrant, though threatening another person is never warranted.

For these reasons, the vote should be con.
Debate Round No. 3
ZaPH

Pro

ZaPH forfeited this round.
WriterSelbe

Con

WriterSelbe forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
ZaPH

Pro

ZaPH forfeited this round.
WriterSelbe

Con

WriterSelbe forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by neveragain 4 years ago
neveragain
ZaPHWriterSelbeTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was better. Con is stupid, mean, and is unamerican.
Vote Placed by dmacgolfer1 4 years ago
dmacgolfer1
ZaPHWriterSelbeTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is better... Con is stupid