The Instigator
Meganrihanne1992x
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
I-am-a-panda
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points

Witness protection should be kept private for all means

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
Con Tied Pro
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: 4/3/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 771 times Debate No: 7660
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)

 

Meganrihanne1992x

Con

My debate is based on an incident that happenned in the 90s

the "james bulgar" incident where two 10year olds kidnapped him and killed him an a train track, released out of prison in 2001 the press /media have been using there publicity and using false images to identify the two boys as now adults.
Though they are both under witness protection , is it fair that these two boys were bieng publically demained all over magazines etc .?
My answer NO!.
Though these two boys did a undescribable despicable crime they were young came from bad backgrounds and bieng young not able to identify the differences between right & wrong.
people should have left/leave them B!
anyone care to debate on this?
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for the debate, and wish her well. To clear up the resolution, I interpret it as that Witness protection should be private on all fronts (E.g. Magazines, newspapers, etc.). That being so, it is noteworthy my opponent has argued against herself, a clear contradiction. Her argument works for my case. I await her response.
Debate Round No. 1
Meganrihanne1992x

Con

Thankyou for taking this challenge i also wish you well.

To try and clarify what my opponent has just stated prior to his arguement , i would like to elaborate more on what the arguement intakes.
& Also to help my opponent understand exactly what im talking about.
"Witness protection" has been put under law to protect any citizens by government protection, with new identitiys, the case im reefering to is one which the media delibratley exposed to try and track down these two boys, My basic arguement is that witness protection should stay in place, and the media should respect that.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
i also site a source to help my opponent understand the incident itself
and to prove my arguement is not contridictary.
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I-am-a-panda forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Meganrihanne1992x

Con

Meganrihanne1992x forfeited this round.
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I-am-a-panda forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by ournamestoolong 7 years ago
ournamestoolong
You did argue against yourself, you wwere CON.
Posted by Meganrihanne1992x 7 years ago
Meganrihanne1992x
No problem. , i respect your opinion by all means (:
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
Thanks for answering Megan,, I did read about the background of these children, via the link you posted, and I thank you for that also, after considering their upbringing and the ill treatment they endured, I am still strongly of the opinion, that they knew what they were doing was wrong, due to my belief, that it is something that is inbuilt from birth, and years later comes into fruition, and no amount of ill treatment can reverse this, However I agree with you entirely when you said they were unaware of the severity of their actions, I'm not out to judge these boys, so please don't think that I'm feeling anything other than what I've written. Thank you. :)
Posted by Meganrihanne1992x 7 years ago
Meganrihanne1992x
Hi i appreciate you questioning this and i can uderstand exactly why you would ask.

My understanding of this case comes from this these two boys were social outkasts and was not raised by a family who gave them affection and enough discipline to detaine them from knowing the differences between law , order and the differences between right & wrong.

Though its unfair to assume that these two boys came from bad backgrounds and "this is why they would follow a disgusting crime" bieng so young fragile and indecisive these two boys were not to know what the risks were and consquences and so by doing this they were brought up believing that this sort of action was acceptable.
They were not educated enough physically and mentally to distinguish such principles.
Society as a whole should teach young children moral , spiritual and social cultrual development, it was said that one of the boys had anger problems and mental health deteroiration.

Some people do not know the difference between right and wrong till there around 20, society and familys are to blame in my opinion for this.
To conclude this i hope i answered your question that these two boys were unaware of the differences between right & wrong.

thanks
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
I am quite familiar with this case, my question is this, If the boys were unable to determine right from wrong, why did they take the child away from a busy shopping mall to the secluded area of a railway line before killing him,

Another question is this,
If the boys did not know right from wrong, why would the judge have them detained indefinitely, It is my understanding that the age of acountability is eight years old for the UK. Thus, they did know what they doing was wrong. please reply, Thank you.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by wonderwoman 7 years ago
wonderwoman
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70 
Vote Placed by The_Booner 7 years ago
The_Booner
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by LB628 7 years ago
LB628
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
Justinisthecrazy
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Camuls 7 years ago
Camuls
Meganrihanne1992xI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70