The Instigator
Orangedinossaur
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
David_Debates
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should public schools support the walkout for the shooting victims?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/13/2018 Category: Economics
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 544 times Debate No: 110671
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

Orangedinossaur

Con

On Wednesday 14 March 2018 schools across the US will walk out of class to remember the school shooting victims from the Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. But this is a protest that is supporting gun control.

I will be going against the walkout being supported by public schools. The opponent will be for the walkout being supported by public schools. There will be no talk of the victims during this debate.

This walkout is wasting the tax payers money and disrupting the school day and the student education. Along with this students will also be in one place which is dangerous and could cause another school shooting. Along with it being dangerous for the students it is also supporting gun control. Public schools have no reasons to be in politics.

Again in this debate there will be no talk of the victims of the schooting.
David_Debates

Pro

The walkout is legally protected free speech and assembly. Taxpayer money is specifically intended to protect these rights, and as such, it is in no way a waste of money, as Con would have you believe.

As to Con's contention that it disrupts the school day, there are many events which can disrupt the school day. None of them have significantly impacted the learning experience for the children, and I would contend that allowing students to rally behind a cause, be it for or against gun control, leads to unity in school which may indeed cause students to want to learn about public issues. This does not disrupt education, if anything, it encourages it.

Con also argues that this is a bad thing because it gets high schools into politics. As I've stated before, we all have a right to express our views, be that at public school or in our private residence. If students rally together to recognize the Douglas High School shooting, this type of speech and assembly ought to be encouraged among the young in our communities, to get them engaged in politics. I assume that Con will argue that it is also wrong for the government to take a stand on this issue, yet that is the purpose of our government; to determine what is legal and what is not is the very definition of politics. Furthermore, these public schools are not forcing these high schoolers to hold a certain opinion if they choose to participate in the walkout. Instead, these schools are asking us to remember the shooting itself, and its victims.

Con states that there should be no talk of the victims of the shooting, yet this may very well be the reason why many want to participate in this walkout. I am unsure, why Con wants to limit this relevant information in this debate. Perhaps it is because he realizes that this is not only about gun control, but also about remembrance for many.

While I am personally opposed to gun control, I cannot force my views on others, as this would be both unconstitutional and misdirect the purpose of this walkout. For these reasons, I affirm that these high schools and their students have the right to perform this walkout.
Debate Round No. 1
Orangedinossaur

Con

Public schools are supporting a protest which is wasting the taxpayers money by allowing students to leave their educational environments. Also this protest is for gun control which public schools should have no say on.
David_Debates

Pro

It is worth it to point out that Con did not respond to any of my arguments, rather, he restated two sentences which he already wrote in R1. A lack of any rebuttal to my contentions whatsoever counts as completely dropping them. For this reason alone, I would ask to vote Con.

A brief rebuttal, then I will conclude.

Statement: "Public schools are supporting a protest"
Response: Which they have the constitutional right to do. The amendments to the United States Constitution protect people, not places, and the fact that the people that wish to participate in this protest are from public schools has no bearing on their rights to free speech and assembly.

Statement: "It wastes taxpayer money"
Response: To allow students to voice their opinion? To get them involved in politics? To spark their love of learning about current events? And, perhaps most importantly, to offer remembrance to those who were lost in a shooting? Hardly a waste of money, Con.

Statement: "It allows students to leave their educational environments"
Response: Breaks, recesses, even holidays all disrupt the educational schedule. Should these be canceled as well? Con's point is completely false when actually analyzed on its face. I don't even think Con believes that breaks are a bad thing, especially a break that gives students the ability to participate in a political event.

Statement: "The protest is for gun control which public schools should have no say on"
Response: If the protest was against gun control, would it be allowable? This is a partisian argument that can easily be flipped. See my above response on our rights secured to us by the amendments to our Constitution.

Students ought to have the ability to exercise their 1st amendment rights, and this walkout is an example of their right to speech and assembly. To deny them these rights is unconstitutional and prohibits their education. For these reasons, I negate.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by jtlove 5 months ago
jtlove
Cole478: I don't think you're accurate on saying Congress doesn't care about their opinions. I'm positive many of Congressmen/women have concerns over the violence that has taken place. However, the liberal media/agenda has pushed the position that the only solution is gun control and the students are being exploited. They don't comprehend the complexity of the law, constitution, or the root cause. The only thing they communicate as knowing is no guns, no armed teachers, how to threaten politicians and the NRA.

On 60 Mins Emma Gonz"lez commented that the school had no money to buy paper, but all of a sudden there's $5M for security, then she says along the line "that just mess up." Obviously, she has no understanding of gov't funding and if the school did not have paper that was a local budget problem. If they think that's an issue, then start advocating for an increase in a levy to get additional taxes from the people in the school district. However, in most case, people don't want to pay additional taxes. But to Emma, it makes no sense.

David Hogg was on twitter and said they should pass a law not allowing people convicted of domestic violence to have guns. Really, there has been a law on the books now for 10+ yrs. As a matter of fact, its called the Lautenberg Amendment, it also does not allow the military to arm a person who has committed a domestic violence offense.

My point is, these kids really don't know the depth of the issues they are protesting. Taking guns away will not stop people from committing mass murders. As Congresswoman Black stated today, the root cause is mental illness. We need to start with security and mental illness. Heck, if Parkland had a competent sheriffs office this wouldn't have happened.

The kids are being exploited! It's not their fault.
Posted by Cole478 5 months ago
Cole478
In my opinion, schools should not support the walkout, but they have no right to infringe on it either. And while the students will do nothing, because congress doesn't care about their opinions, they still have the right to protest. But students need to be reminded, their actions can still have consequences. Schools have every right to suspend students for walking out of class. And to top it all off, if you are under 16, it is actually illegal for you to leave school to protest; you must wait until after school is over to protest legally.
Posted by jtlove 5 months ago
jtlove
I'm not trying to be a pain in the side, but when I see people making conjectures and pass them off as factual statements it concerns me. As far as students free speech and right to protest here are to court rulings.

The landmark Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District determined that students do have free speech rights in school as long as it doesn"t disrupt the school environment.

Another Supreme Court case, Morse v. Frederick, said free speech couldn"t contradict the educational mission of the school.

So, as you can student do not have the right to walkout and protest during school hours, and their expression of speech cannot contradict the educational mission of the school. As Pro, pointed out, kids are at school to learn, that's what the tax payers money is for. However, when you combine a liberal initiative with liberal minded teach/administrators you get instance like what we saw yesterday on the news.

Not all, put a good portion of the walkouts did not look like a period of reflection/morning of the deceased. It look appeared to me to be typical teen playtime with adults pushing an agenda.
Posted by jtlove 5 months ago
jtlove
David_Debates: You made the assertion that "The walkout is legally protected free speech and assembly. Taxpayer money is specifically intended to protect these rights, and as such, it is in no way a waste of money"

Can you give me a court case ruling on that or what regulation your using for such statements?

From my understand it has long been a know fact that minors, do not have the same protected rights as adults. If they did then, they would not have to go to school, they could say whatever they wanted i.e. be disrespectful and be protected.

Disagree on your assertion on tax-payer dollars for education. You obviously don't understand how appropriations work and how tax payers are earmark for specific expenditures. The Dept of Education does not provide funding for students to protest. I can't speak to local school boards and their levies, but I would have a hard time believing a school district sets aside funding for student protest. Again, I would like to see an example of a district that does.
Posted by David_Debates 5 months ago
David_Debates
But I'm Catholic... And why would me being a Jew mean others ought to vote for you?
Posted by Orangedinossaur 5 months ago
Orangedinossaur
The pro is a Jew vote for me.
Posted by jtlove 5 months ago
jtlove
Concur, the advocacy for gun control is miss placed. The issue is human behavior, we should be figuring out why they do things like this. Verses just saying guns kill people so take the guns away. It just won't work.
Posted by jtlove 5 months ago
jtlove
Concur, the advocacy for gun control is miss placed. The issue is human behavior, we should be figuring out why they do things like this. Verses just saying guns kill people so take the guns away. It just won't work.
Posted by Nd2400 5 months ago
Nd2400
I will agree with you. The walk out is stupid. It not going to change a damn thing. It totally point less.
No votes have been placed for this debate.