The Instigator
akshat_1993_me
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
bonnieboy
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points

non-violence is practical

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 1/25/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,557 times Debate No: 2180
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

akshat_1993_me

Pro

it depends on the situation

think of a person assaulting a cop
that cop at first will give a verbal warning to the attacker to back away
if that doesnt work the cop puts his/her hand of their gun
hopefullly u see where im going with this....

i guess that would be a situation where it is practical
like i said though it depends on the situation
bonnieboy

Con

violence is neccisary if you are in a life or death situation. for instance, i got carjacked in florida, and punched the guy. he took out a nife, and i was stabbed. i was alright, but i knocked him out with the next punch. i'm a pretty big guy, so it was quite easy.

i need to know if you mean don't use self-defense, or non violence
Debate Round No. 1
akshat_1993_me

Pro

akshat_1993_me forfeited this round.
bonnieboy

Con

bonnieboy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
akshat_1993_me

Pro

akshat_1993_me forfeited this round.
bonnieboy

Con

bonnieboy forfeited this round.
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 QTAY21 2 years ago
QTAY21
akshat_1993_mebonnieboyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: I think pro's argument is a bit unrealistic. It may sound noble to hold the police to meet non-violent standards, but it's different when you're in the situation. You don't have time to think when you're in a fight, and their training doesn't support this for good reasons. The cop may not know this person. If the assaulter was actually crazy enough to attack the officer, who knows how far they could take the confrontation. Cops are trained to neutralize the threat as soon as possible. I know it sounds like cops are too violent with all of the hate going out there for them, but that's just a false image. Most of them are not actually trigger-happy.
Vote Placed by ComradeJon1 9 years ago
ComradeJon1
akshat_1993_mebonnieboyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30