The Instigator
harrytruman
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Jonbonbon
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

is bit coin legal?

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: 9/7/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 750 times Debate No: 79491
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (39)
Votes (0)

 

harrytruman

Con

Bit coin is illegal under the coinage act of 1857.
Jonbonbon

Pro

I have a couple points to bring up against my opponent. I'm basically just going to state a point then make a request.

1) Bitcoin is an international form of payment accepted in numerous different countries aside from the U.S. [1] therefore one U.S. doesn't make Bitcoin as a whole illegal.

2) I'm just going to request that my opponent clarify why the Coinage Act of 1857 makes Bitcoin illegal. That needs to be clarified before it can be accepted as a substantiated argument.

Sources:

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
harrytruman

Con

The coinage act of 1857 prohibited the use of foreign coin in trade, I would also like to state that it is untraceable and this makes it favorable to criminals, other countries can lose billions to the bit coin scam but it is illegal in the us.
Jonbonbon

Pro

Thanks for that response.

I guess I just have two points to make then.

1) Bitcoin is not foreign as foreign means belonging to a particular country [1]. Since Bitcoin is above national boundaries, the word "foreign" cannot be applied to it. (Not to mention I still haven't seen evidence on my opponents side to support the claim, because I'm not looking at that coinage act unless my opponent posts it).

2) Bitcoin is completely traceable. "All Bitcoin purchases are public, traceable, and permanently stored in the Bitcoin network." [2] So actually it would increase security to make Bitcoin transactions the standard for currency.

So Bitcoin is not a scam and not illegal.

Sources:

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[2] https://bitcoin.org...
Debate Round No. 2
harrytruman

Con

Here is the link to the coinage act of 1857:
https://enough.m.wikipedia.org...
Any coin not issued by the United states mint is foreign coin.
I would like to reinstate bitcoins use for criminal activities through these links:
http://securityintelligence.com...
www.wired.com/2012/05/fbi-fears-bitcoin
Jonbonbon

Pro

There's some evidence, thank you for that response. Now allow me to criticize everything my opponent just did and said. Or rebut it. I don't know what you guys want to call it.

1) Plagiarism: this is a fairly significant point. In writing one cannot simply say a point then use someone else's words to back it up. My opponent hasn't offered any sort of original argument. So either we reject the argument, or we count it as plagiarism.

2) What the evidence actually says: (a) the first source I couldn't even open. I'm not sure if that's just a problem on my end, but I was unable to read that, (b) I don't see the significance of the second source, since any form of currency can be used by ISIS as long as they can get their hands on it (c) and the third source puts all of its credibility and points on another source that wasn't posted in this debate.

I believe my other arguments still stand. I would give a refresher, but my character count is almost up. Thanks for reading
Debate Round No. 3
39 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
Why can't you at least consider what I'm saying? Are you really that hard headed? Or is it just because I disagree with you that I'm the one who's wrong? I posted a source and everything. You're just calling me a liar
Posted by harrytruman 1 year ago
harrytruman
Give me a break, don't act like you actually think that I plagiarized you know I didn't, if I went any deeper I'd just waste more time, until your ready to drop this straw man fallacy of yours, shut up, shut up, get it? Good.
Posted by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't even remember you explaining yourself here. You just keep calling me a liar and insulting me. Sure you said that you put links in the ties round to support what you said in the second round; however, you didn't actually make full arguments in the second round. You made a statement, and you posted someone else's words to back up that statement. But what you said wasn't original. It was basically just the general idea from the sources. That means your statement wasn't even an original statement.
Posted by harrytruman 1 year ago
harrytruman
Dont even start this, I went through this, you're not stupid, stop acting like it.
Posted by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
Well you only used like one sentence to explain your argument, which was just the general idea of the sources. In other words, it was just the title. It's not an argument, that's an assertion. Essentially, you never added anything other than the basic idea of your sources, which means you didn't make your own argument. You just asserted a one sentence summary of your sources. That means, your argument consists of a title and a five page article written by someone else. That means you plagiarized.
Posted by harrytruman 1 year ago
harrytruman
I put links in my third round to back up the previous two, not as my debate, you know that.
Posted by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
Pleas explain where you made your own argument.
Posted by harrytruman 1 year ago
harrytruman
No, I made my own argument, and I do not tolerate liars.
Posted by harrytruman 1 year ago
harrytruman
No.
Posted by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
Jonbonbon
Oh you're probably like 13 or 14 aren't you?
No votes have been placed for this debate.