The Instigator
Reynaldo
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
FuzzyCatPotato
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

THW Punish bystanders of a crime

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  
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: 10/29/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 448 times Debate No: 64144
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Reynaldo

Con

Write the statement than explain it
Please
i am new to debate
and bad to grammar
FuzzyCatPotato

Pro

Resolved: Bystanders of a crime ought to be punished.

The question becomes, is it moral to punish bystanders (those who see the crime happening and can stop it, but do not)? The answer is clearly yes.

PREFER UTILITARIANISM

Utilitarianism states that actions for the benefit of the majority of the population are moral.

Why should we look to util?

1st, util maximizes our ability to be moral in the future. We need to be able to act on whatever morality is the correct one, and we can only do so through keeping the maximum number of people alive and educated. Util does exactly this.

2nd, util avoids value conflicts. Almost all other ethical systems are based on absolutes. For example, autonomy-based systems say that it's never acceptable to violate someone's autonomy. This means that, if you were faced with censoring Albert Einstein or Forrest Gump, you can't choose between the two, because both people's right to speak is absolute and cannot be violated. Util avoids this, because it's possible to weigh Einstein's freedom against Gump's and choose the more important one.

3rd, real-world education. In the real world, policymakers use util to make policy decisions. A policymaker thinks, "Why raise or lower taxes or increase or decrease infrastructure spending? Because it benefits more people than it harms." Debate should emulate the real world to prepare debaters to debate IRL.

CONTENTION 1: IT'S UTILITARIAN TO PUNISH BYSTANDERS

Consider how many crimes could be stopped if only somebody stood up. If someone is robbing someone, you have a duty to at least call the police, rather than just ignoring it. Hate crimes, especially, could be stopped, if only listeners stood up. Thus, punishing bystanders helps solve at least some crimes.

Crimes hurt utility by reducing incentives to productively work. Thus, it's utilitarian to solve crimes.

Thus, we, as a society, should shun those who allow crimes to go on, in order to make it more likely that people will stand up to crimes.

---

By the way, is this for homework or something? =)
Debate Round No. 1
Reynaldo

Con

Reynaldo forfeited this round.
FuzzyCatPotato

Pro

Pro has forfeited Round 2. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
Reynaldo

Con

Reynaldo forfeited this round.
FuzzyCatPotato

Pro

FuzzyCatPotato forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Reynaldo

Con

Reynaldo forfeited this round.
FuzzyCatPotato

Pro

FuzzyCatPotato forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by notyourbusiness 2 years ago
notyourbusiness
If the time to responded is extended (3 hours is honestly too little!) I will accept the challenge.
No votes have been placed for this debate.