The Instigator
PolicyDebateTOC
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
bigbass3000
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

Sending FBI agents to South Africa to prosecute human traffickers

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/12/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,035 times Debate No: 2596
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (9)

 

PolicyDebateTOC

Pro

South Africa is the transit point and destination of human trafficking. Rape is a fate worse than death and is a form of commodification. FBI has empirically solved threats like this in Hungary and is currently working with South Africa in other matters, training police to combat terrorism. No disadvantage links.
bigbass3000

Con

We should not send F.B.I. agents, we should send programs, to help, not the F.B.I.," Every year we add to our knowledge of the trafficking phenomenon. The 2007 Report sheds new light on the alarming trafficking of people for purposes of forced labor, often in their own countries. Conventional approaches to dealing with forced or bonded labor usually focus on compliance, in line with international conventions (i.e., ILO Conventions 29, 39, 105 and 182). These approaches seek to have exploitative industries comply with the law simply by releasing victims or offering financial compensation. Approaches to combating forced labor that rely solely on compliance with labor standards can be weak because these approaches fail to punish those responsible for trafficking. While administrative sanctions are effective for deterring some labor violations, forced labor must be punished as a crime, through vigorous prosecutions. While most countries in the world have criminalized forced
labor, they do little to prosecute offenders, in part due to the lack of awareness of forced labor issues among law enforcement officials. The Department of State, as directed by Congress through the TVPA, continues to increase its attention on forced labor and bonded labor, while maintaining its campaign against sex trafficking. As with the last two Reports, this Report
places several countries on Tier 3 primarily as a result of their failure to address trafficking for forced labor among foreign migrant workers."

What we need to do is set up programs in the country to give aid to stop trafficking, programs to help the victims, and programs to educate. My opponent, does not get it, you cannot just throw investigators at the probelm, you need to set up programs to help it. Also we already have F.B.I. agents there investigating the probelm, now they can't prosecute, because that is out of the U.S. juristidiction, but we do investigate, because it is one of our nations major interests right now. http://www.state.gov...
Debate Round No. 1
PolicyDebateTOC

Pro

I'll win that sending FBI is a unique and unconventional approach to the problem.

1. FBI are the best at combatting this transnational threat.
2. You're dropping that there is empiricical solvency, theres only a risk that we would make things better but theres no offense as to why FBI would re-entrench the problem.

Only coordination and cooperation solve. Yes, if they were by themselves they'd do nothing, but 3 things that South Africa lacks
a) Not enough money -- FBI would aid in that fashion to help maintain stability
b) Ports do not have enough security -- FBI would be there to protect and stop traffickers from entering
c) They have very weak witness protection programs -- FBI would protect witnesses. Currently they fear that traffickers will kill their families.

You're missing the point. We dont just throw investigators. Cooperation is the only way to solve. Aid programs dont help because they presuppose a certain level of stability when there is none. Only FBI serve as the pre-requisite. And, we'll also win that aid programs are ineffective and embolden bad regimes. Empirical evidence that money the US has given has been ineffective and gone to corrupt leaders.

The FBI there now are not prosecuting -- they are training police officials in other matters. MLAT and cooperation solves your offense because the treaties grant the ability to for our FBI agents to presecute. At worst you'll win that they aren't able to, but that doesnt matter because cross apply the 3 things the FBI would solve that South Africa lacks now.

These are not the conventional approaches that rely on strict rules. Madeline Albright in 1998 said that only joint law enforcement efforts through an integration of law and non legal measures can solve. Either there is no distinction between your alternative or my case which means a permutation solves the offense

Only a risk that the case solves means its a good idea. The only arguments he gives are defense as to why the FBI may not solve.

Now look, 9 people get trafficked every day. The fact that the FBI has successfully done this in the past gives validity to the claim that this plan will likely work. Trafficking is a fate worse than death, meaning the impacts outweigh any defense on why the case may not work.
bigbass3000

Con

YOu are saying the F.B.I., can prosecute, individuals, that have nothing to do, nothing to do, on american soil. "The government's anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts were increasingly visible during the year. South Africa does not have laws that prohibit trafficking in persons, though a variety of other criminal statutes are currently used to prosecute trafficking crimes. The lack of specific anti-trafficking statutes and explicit penalties for trafficking crimes continued to hamper South African law enforcement efforts,
as many working level police, labor, and social welfare officials possessed little understanding of the crime or did not view it as part of their responsibilities.", So maybe we need to get the country to have laws on Trafficking rather than us prosecuting it. They can train, but not prosecute, my opponent also has shown no evidence to prove this point.
Debate Round No. 2
PolicyDebateTOC

Pro

Yes, I am saying that FBI are able to ASSIST trafficked victims and the entire witness protection program. You dropped that even if they themselves cannot prosecute, that they're still able to solve through increased cooperation.

You also drop that MLATs and extradition treaties solve your offense--they offer the possibility of prosecution.

This was done in Hungary, again, as an empirical example, non uniquing your claims that it isnt possible.

Yes South Africa doesnt have the laws that solve for trafficking, hence why FBI assistance is crucial. Legal measures alone wont work -- only assistance on the ground can solve.

3 things that win me the round, and I just need to win one:
a) LAck of money means South Africa cant fight the problem correctly -- FBI solve that through extra resources
b) Greater protection in port facilities gaurantees fewer traffickers get by
c) Assistance in witness protection programs means people will speak out to prosecute the brothels.

I wish I could upload evidence from my 1AC but thats not too easy to do, so unfortunately cant do that.

Look, his argument is ALL defense. If you think that theres a RISK that just maybe one FBI agent can help eliminate some trafficking, save one extra person, then it means a vote for the affirmative. The entire point is that since south africa doesnt have the legislation to deal with this threat, the US has to help.

Africa is asking for help (Leonardo McCarthy..you can look up his report on google if you want) is an african leader and says that south africa doesnt want paper agreements, rather TANGIBLE commitments.

FBI have empirically gone out to do things just like this, takes out any risk of the defense against the case where you said that they have nothing to do with american soil. Trafficking is a transnational crime that effects the entire world.

Obvious policy to pass. Dont think it gets much simpler than this. 1% chance we improve the status quo = aff ballot.
bigbass3000

Con

South Africa does not need F.B.I., a sI already said my opponent has not gven this eveidence to me, or provided links to back up any of his claims. Lastly, South Africa needs reform, not F.B.I. agents, they can not prosecute in another country. South Africa as I will say again, needs reforms to be better on the probelm, not prosecuters, why because we should not do a job, that another government can do, if is had laws against it. Vote neg, don't listen to him, he has shown a single card to back up his claims, thus I win.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
Go Pro! I could go for 25 characters right now.
Posted by PolicyDebateTOC 9 years ago
PolicyDebateTOC
what moron voted for him?
Posted by PolicyDebateTOC 9 years ago
PolicyDebateTOC
wow, you're an idiot. two separate articles here:

Successes like these are due in large part to the FBI's efforts to reorganize around our top three priorities: counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and cyber. We have dedicated new resources and built up our capabilities in these areas. We will continue to use our resources strategically, focusing on areas where we bring something special to the table. But these changes are only the beginning. Threats continue to evolve, and the FBI must continue to evolve. If we are to address growing threats, the FBI must build up our capabilities to address crimes that cross borders, and we must remain as agile and adaptive, as the global networks and organizations that threaten us.
The age of global threats has moved the Bureau into an age of global partnerships. The clear-cut divisions of responsibility and jurisdiction that once existed between agencies - and even between the United States and other countries - are becoming less and less relevant. How can we defeat international terrorism, for example, without the help of countries such as Great Britain, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Kenya?

The Department and the FBI are working hard at many different levels to improve law enforcement cooperation between countries and engineer multi-national cases that attack the most dangerous transnational criminal enterprises operating between Europe and the United States. I would like to begin my discussion of our efforts by talking about one of the most innovative approaches to cooperative law enforcement to be found anywhere in the world - the joint FBI/Hungarian National Police organized crime task force in Budapest, Hungary.
The events that triggered the need for this task force arose from the collapse and fragmentation of the Soviet Union. As I previously noted, following the collapse, organized crime exploded throughout Russia, the new republics, and eastern Europe.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by aodanu16 9 years ago
aodanu16
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by twinkiesunite 9 years ago
twinkiesunite
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by rnsweetswimn1 9 years ago
rnsweetswimn1
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by rnsweetheart 9 years ago
rnsweetheart
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by DaPofoKing 9 years ago
DaPofoKing
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by PolicyDebateTOC 9 years ago
PolicyDebateTOC
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by noobsavior 9 years ago
noobsavior
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by bigbass3000 9 years ago
bigbass3000
PolicyDebateTOCbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03