The Instigator
Aksh7
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JohnMaynardKeynes
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points

Should Cyber-bullying be a crime

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 5 votes the winner is...
JohnMaynardKeynes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/23/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 829 times Debate No: 57058
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

Aksh7

Con

Should cyper-bullying be a crime. Most people are stuck on this question and I am here to answer it. I think it should not be a crime because of many reasons. It is vital that you support my viewpoint. Cyber-bullying should not be a crime because it is the way a person takes in the bullying. If a person on Facebook calls you stupid, it is cyber-bullying but people won't take it in account. Many people have been cyber-bullied and most did not care or even fight back. Some extremely sensitive people do some crazy things like suicide and the rest of the world should pay for their mistakes. In my opinion I disbelieve that. And if they are sensitive, they should not be having any social networks if they know that they are sensitive. I think they should know that. Most cases of cyper-bullying has been revenge or that person did something or put themselves in the spot for that. A normal student does not get bullied.This is my argument of showing why cyber-bulling should not be a crime.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

Most states have laws addressing cyberbullying [1. http://tinyurl.com...]. CON is arguing against the status quo and has the sole BOP.

CON says that bullying is subjective, then gives an irrelevant example. Cyberbullying is defined as "willful and repeated use of cell phones, computers, and other electronic communication devices to harass and threaten others." In no way is this definition inclusive of calling someone stupid once over FB.

He claims that many victims of cyberbullying "didn't care." Where is his proof? According to a piece in JAMA pediatrics, cyberbullying is more likely to lead to suicidal thoughts than traditional bullying [2. http://tinyurl.com...]. He then says that sensitive people should avoid social networks. Why is he blaming the victim? Why is it their fault?

Where is his evidence that most cases of cyber bullying are for revenge, or that the victim deserved it, or that normal students don't get bullied? I was bullied. Am I not normal? Did I ask for it?
Debate Round No. 1
Aksh7

Con

That is not my point. My point is that if people are sensitive why are they having social networking. Not only that but bullying if a very bad thing if you take it in account. I don't think you did anything crazy because is you pervious argument you were very knowledgable and detailed yet there were some mistakes. Like the definition is word for word but then if it was word for word then what is bullying over FB or any other social networks?
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

So CON says "that wasn't my point," but goes onto repeat himself by blaming the victims. Why do sensitive people use social networks? Because they have as much a right to use them as anything else and there are a myriad of benefits to using them, such as connecting with friends or finding a job.

He says bullying is a really bad thing. I agree. But this statement is in support of the resolution, especially in light of the sourcing I provided from JAMA Pediatrics.

He says he doesn't think I did anything crazy, so he effectively concedes that his statement that "normal students don't get bullied" is fallacious.

He says I made a mistake by providing a word-for-word definition. I quoted and cited my source. How is this a mistake?

He asks what cyberbullying over FB et al. is. Let me give you an example. If you consistently send someone death threats over Facebook, you are cyberbullying. It's essentially willful, repetitive harassment. Banning that is merely utilitarian.


Debate Round No. 2
Aksh7

Con

You are a very knowledgable person but you can't answer my question.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

First I would like to point out an unintentional mistake in my last argument. The definition came from the first source, and I intended to type a (1) but did not. My apologies.

CON states that I did not answer his question, but this is utter nonsense. He did not dispute the definition or any of my sourcing, but merely asked, "[W]hat is bullying over FB or any other social networks?" And I answered his question: It is willful, repetitive harassment, such as pestering someone with death threats over FB.

There is nothing left to rebut, as my opponent hasn't provided any further rebuttals, nor has he responded to my rebuttals, nor has he fulfilled his burden of proof. Most important, my final point that banning cyberbullying is utilitarian -- that is, it would produce the maximum amount of utlity and reduce suffering -- was dropped.

Why should we have a society that tolerates bullyiny of any kind? The JAMA Pediatrics piece -- again, which CON dropped -- proves this point fully.

Vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by 420blazeityourmum 2 years ago
420blazeityourmum
your mum is a crime
Posted by JustinAMoffatt 2 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
Instigators rarely win 1 round debates...

If you can even call it a debate...

Why not try lengthening the debate a bit? :)

Nice points, too! I would suggest possibly formatting things a bit differently. Check out some of the bigger (higher elo) debaters on here and see how they do it. You can learn a lot. :)

Welcome to DDO!
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Aksh7JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: con got his question answered and barely rebutted pro's arguments
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Aksh7JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used sources
Vote Placed by mishapqueen 2 years ago
mishapqueen
Aksh7JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't have much to say, and rarely directly refuted Pro. Pro had excellent arguments and evidence.
Vote Placed by IceClimbers 2 years ago
IceClimbers
Aksh7JohnMaynardKeynesTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: i do not agree that cyber bullying should be a crime but pro arguments sounds very convincing
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
ESocialBookworm
Aksh7JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro answered Con's question and provided suitable, well-sourced arguments on why cyber bullying should be a crime. Con failed to meet the BoP. Con also had several grammatical errors, such as "pervious" but I shall leave that point shared as it was probably just a simple error. Clear win for Pro.