The Instigator
Cheremy
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CJKAllstar
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

advanced interrogation methods should be implemented on anyone who breaks the law

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 1 vote the winner is...
CJKAllstar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 535 times Debate No: 49561
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

Cheremy

Pro

I believe that advanced interrogation methods such as water boarding, sleep deprivation , and confining people in small spaces for extended periods of time, etc.
CJKAllstar

Con

I accept. You may put forward your case.
Debate Round No. 1
Cheremy

Pro

Cheremy forfeited this round.
CJKAllstar

Con

Your motion does not make sense.
By directly following the motion, due to the lack of an argument, you are saying that anyone who breaks the law should be effectively tortured after trial. Simply because you stated, anyone who breaks the law, but people are only innocent until proven guilty and given a fair trial in most western courts, so we only know someone has broken the law after a trial. And to state anyone who breaks the law implies any sort of perversion from the law, from littering to murder counts. Do you already see the problems? Firstly, what is the point of this after someone has been caught? Surely the purpose of interrogation is to find out whether they did a crime, so afterwards, I can only assume data extraction. But if someone littered, then what data can there be to extract? I do not need to delve into the absurdity of interrogating after a trial, or after someone commits any crime, also because secondly, you will be torturing petty thiefs, pickpockets and those who litter. For what? As a deterrent? Well surely other than a deterrent there is no arguable moral reason to torture one who litters. And as a deterrent it is brutally immoral. As it is any crime, I can assure you that there will be a large number in the falsely tortured, which then has no justifiable reasoning. Also, the monetary and social practicality is minute. For every last crime to result in a torture, the amount of places for torture needed will be outside the budget of any Government, and not to mention that torture hostels will need to be common. And the backlash from the public will be too much of an issue.

I urge the floor that this is not semantics. He did not explain his case so making any assumption on when to use it or how would be stupid, as these are subjective issues. The only thing I can argue this point by is by the motion defined, which is "advanced interrogation methods should be implemented on anyone who breaks the law", in which everything above applies to this exactly, so I urge you to vote for me.
Debate Round No. 2
Cheremy

Pro

Cheremy forfeited this round.
CJKAllstar

Con

I extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by The_Serb 2 years ago
The_Serb
well. would you steal a car if you knew that the local police station was equipped with a torture chamber?

I certainly would think twice :D
Posted by Kleptin 2 years ago
Kleptin
Interesting debate. I can see good arguments on both sides.
Posted by Hematite12 2 years ago
Hematite12
What is this I don't even
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
CheremyCJKAllstarTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF + extended arguments