The classism is a point I wanted to avoid because i think this does mitigate it a bit, as for removing the ability to plea bargain, I am not sure it makes an interesting debate. It is a simple moral argument.
The same type of argument that makes the Alford plea unfair. One side (me) would argue that it is more fair to just give everyone a trial, but the other side will argue as they always do that the system would be flooded with too many cases to handle, which is a pragmatic argument, but misses the point hat the system being overloaded would mean that enforcement of crime would have to be more laid back with victimless crimes like smoking weed or car jacking.
My biggest issue with your justice system would almost entirely resolve itself by removing the ability to plea bargain. I know, madness at the beginning, but if you see the policy changes that arise from the chaos it will correct so much. Also ban trials by judges. Make them all jury trials by default and perhaps allow them to refuse the default but judges as a default for petty crimes in some areas, man that a lot of people are getting screwed just because it is easier to accept a light sentence than fight for your freedom because you are innocent
I have limited this to 750 characters precisely so odd conspiracy theories like the one you mentioned can't be explained as conspiracy theories tend to take a lot of character space .
If anyone else is interested just challenge me to a 4 round or 5 round debate and forfeit the first round. Needs to be the same rules as this debate as well
Judges will use a form of abductive reasoning when judging a debate. I would advise you to present a better case that your opponent rather than simply arguing what I call.
"Nuh uh"
At most "nuh uh" mitigates your opponents arguments, it doesn't build your case.
Existential dread is terrible to deal with. They will figure it out younger than you think, so you should ease their dread with mythology like heavan, but let them know that heaven would be okay but you would miss them a lot so they should keep their self preservation habits.
Sorry that you have disgusting dick because of inconsiderate parents. Maybe one day you find girl with clit on the side of the vagina your dick is bent towards. If your dick is bent upward than please provide age if you are adult
You cannot avoid sin. If you live in a peaceful world it is because you directly benefit from violent men keeping the peace. If your clothes are affordable it is due to the child slaves that Nike hires among almost every other clothing brand. If you eat meat you have made the slaughter of an innocent being profitable.
It is best to embrace these things, not wrap yourself in some holy shroud and pretend you are above them. The only people above this are probably living in caves in Africa with very short lifespans.
Why do you want the guys to live? Do you like the gay? Me I have no problem with hem, but I cannot marry hem and take there mo ey, so it does not concern me if they die.
https://ifunny.co/picture/santa-deniers-be-like-guess-was-wrong-xxFVMvCA8
Please add a community note about the factuality of pro's statements. Santa deniers spreading misinformation is a threat to democracy.
Everyone agrees with this the argument is typically over whether America should have secure border.
Democrats say no and Republicans say yes, but both sides want increased legal immigration
I had a good argument too. This sucks
I appreciate the feedback.
The classism is a point I wanted to avoid because i think this does mitigate it a bit, as for removing the ability to plea bargain, I am not sure it makes an interesting debate. It is a simple moral argument.
The same type of argument that makes the Alford plea unfair. One side (me) would argue that it is more fair to just give everyone a trial, but the other side will argue as they always do that the system would be flooded with too many cases to handle, which is a pragmatic argument, but misses the point hat the system being overloaded would mean that enforcement of crime would have to be more laid back with victimless crimes like smoking weed or car jacking.
My biggest issue with your justice system would almost entirely resolve itself by removing the ability to plea bargain. I know, madness at the beginning, but if you see the policy changes that arise from the chaos it will correct so much. Also ban trials by judges. Make them all jury trials by default and perhaps allow them to refuse the default but judges as a default for petty crimes in some areas, man that a lot of people are getting screwed just because it is easier to accept a light sentence than fight for your freedom because you are innocent
Tag any competent debater but I wanted feedback on my argument and how you would attack it, even if it gives my opponent ammunition
I have limited this to 750 characters precisely so odd conspiracy theories like the one you mentioned can't be explained as conspiracy theories tend to take a lot of character space .
If anyone else is interested just challenge me to a 4 round or 5 round debate and forfeit the first round. Needs to be the same rules as this debate as well
Thank you for pointing this out. I am not sure I know of a fun strategy to win though. It would likely be a boring win.
Judges will use a form of abductive reasoning when judging a debate. I would advise you to present a better case that your opponent rather than simply arguing what I call.
"Nuh uh"
At most "nuh uh" mitigates your opponents arguments, it doesn't build your case.
Vote for me. No need to read debate since troll debates are unmoderated.
разве не очевидно, что люди не соблюдают закон?
Existential dread is terrible to deal with. They will figure it out younger than you think, so you should ease their dread with mythology like heavan, but let them know that heaven would be okay but you would miss them a lot so they should keep their self preservation habits.
Early critiques on whether babies are pieces of shits deserving of death would be appreciated.
We would take different tracks here. My position is that no human life is innocent
Yes
Mps and fish cancel each other out
I thought it was common sense that at best both sides were arguing for most situations. I hope I worded it better in new debate
I am not angry but I am woman. Ask any woman. Anyone who disagrees with woman is objectively wrong.
I also want to thank everyone and am happy they take time to vote even the ones who vote wrong.
Somebody could win this by clai.ing he is both not or. This would force I stigator to argue against their own points
I no speak good English. Give break comrade.
Barney did not vote. You tag wrong person
Sorry that you have disgusting dick because of inconsiderate parents. Maybe one day you find girl with clit on the side of the vagina your dick is bent towards. If your dick is bent upward than please provide age if you are adult
I enjoy the sounds of pain, but it is wrong for babies to cut dick, because when they grow up they will be less than ideal lovers.
Pro sounds like she needs to get laid.
You cannot avoid sin. If you live in a peaceful world it is because you directly benefit from violent men keeping the peace. If your clothes are affordable it is due to the child slaves that Nike hires among almost every other clothing brand. If you eat meat you have made the slaughter of an innocent being profitable.
It is best to embrace these things, not wrap yourself in some holy shroud and pretend you are above them. The only people above this are probably living in caves in Africa with very short lifespans.
What is thns sanctification?
Without men. I lose my sole source of income. I could go lesbian but women are harder to manipulate
Why do you want the guys to live? Do you like the gay? Me I have no problem with hem, but I cannot marry hem and take there mo ey, so it does not concern me if they die.
American men have too much dick so they cut it. I don't know why.
Won't let me vote. Sorry