The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
13 Points

Was it justified for Wilson to shoot Michael Brown?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/4/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 628 times Debate No: 67798
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




First round is acceptance.
I thank any opponents willing to debate me.
By accepting con you are stating you believe it was not okay for Wilson to have shot Brown.


I happily accept to debate Pro on this matter.
Debate Round No. 1


By assaulting an officer and making it impossible to reach for anything non-lethal and only his gun, Wilson feared for his life, after all by now Brown was trying to take Wilson's gun. Tell me, if a man just robbed a store and then didn't respond to "get down" when you caught him, and then tried to assault you, then reached for your gun, why would you not shoot him? People claim it's Wilson's fault when in reality they just want an excuse to play the racism game. Michael Brown robbed a store, assaulted an officer, and threatened his life, how is that not an excuse for Wilson to kill him? It's well within ROE (Rules of engagement)


I thank Pro for his response.

I would like to remind Pro that the original altercation between Brown and Officer Wilson was a simple case of Jay walking. Officer Wilson was unaware of the robbery at the time of his encounter with Michael Brown. [1]

Secondly, Pro's serious lack of any sources to back his arguments needs to be addressed. It is easily disputable, if Michael Brown actually reached for Darren Wilson's firearm. I will not address this argument as it is unsubstantiated. Moreover, Pro asserted that Brown 'didn't respond to get down' when told to by Wilson; that assertion is mistaken. Brown had his hands up before Officer Wilson fired multiple shots at him. [2] Michael Brown's body was shot, multiple times, 153 feet away from Wilson's SUV.[3]

Lastly, people aren't playing the so-called 'racism game' out of inattentiveness; if anyone is being constantly unfairly targeted by the Police Force, it is, without hesitation, the Afro-american community. Let's look at Ferguson, Missouri where 93% of arrests are targeted towards African Americans [4] when most of the times the white were the ones committing crimes...[5]

Michael Brown was far from being a good Samaritan, but he definitely did not deserve to lose his life on that fateful day. Darren Wilson didn't have the need to pull the trigger. But, I believe, that stereotypes about blacks, as well as Brown's size (an impressive 6'4 for 210 lbs) might of frightened him, hence leading him to murder an unarmed teenager.

Here are my sources :

[2] (From PBS)
Debate Round No. 2


Cloneorder66 forfeited this round.


To conclude, I would like to remind the voters to vote Con because Pro hasn't provided any sources to support his arguments. Moreover I believe to have covered all the notions that Pro has put forward, and managed to elucidate my point of view.

To conclude this interesting debate, I strongly believe that Michael Brown, although not the most innocent of us, unjustly died that day. And to prevent such misfortunes to ever occur again, we must first and foremost recognize the mistakes that have occurred.

I would finally like to thank Pro and all the voters for being part of this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by rikomalpense 1 year ago
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: Conduct: Pro forfeited. S/G: No issues on either side. Arguments: Pro did not rebut Con's final points, point to Con. Sources: Automatic point to Con as Pro did not cite any sources.
Vote Placed by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Clearly con wins