Instigator / Con
10
1439
rating
7
debates
7.14%
won
Topic
#2825

The police should be demilitarized

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
1
2

After 2 votes and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...

Theweakeredge
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
20,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
14
1706
rating
33
debates
80.3%
won
Description

Definition

Militarization of police= "The militarization of police is the use of military equipment and tactics by law enforcement officers. This includes the use of armored personnel carriers, assault rifles, submachine guns, flashbang grenades, grenade launchers, sniper rifles, and Special Weapons and Tactics teams. " Wikipedia

I would of course be arguing against the resolution stated in the debate title and my opponent for the resolution.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Argument - 60% of debate forfeited by Con - Pro

Sources - Both provided sources and neither objected - Tie

S&G - Neither appear under the influence of alcohol whilst typing - Tie

Conduct - Have already awarded Pro with the argument due to excessive forfeiture. Con does not require punishing for same crime twice, and made no personal attacks nor insults - Tie

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

This debate result meets the Voting Policy conclusion of a full forfeit, which is applied against Con for failing to offer any argument beyond R1; this due to loss of membership by moderator ban. Therefore, Pro wins the debate.

However, both participants entered an R1 argument, but neither side's argument was convincing over the other. Same decision on sourcing and legibility. By full forfeit, Con's loss of Conduct is automatic.