EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
384

That we should punish users of extremist websites

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
6 points
CalebfizzelCalebfizzel (PRO)
yes, in the world we live in today extremist website can lead to real life consequences  now online you can join the kkk neo nazis you have the black market (dark web) to sell drugs people and many other things.  then you have the deep web wich on its own is a terrifying place this is the place of deep coding meant for the best of the best coders and hackers. 
stick to facebook because in our day in age a crime can be just as bad online as it is in the real world 

Return To Top | Posted:
2018-04-28 01:18:30
| Speak Round
Undovic88Undovic88 (CON)
Let me begin by clarifying that it is NOT illegal to be a member of the KKK, Neo-Nazis or any similar group. 

Our first amendment rights:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

These websites do indeed fall under the right to assemble in this case. Not the deep web or the dark web (which are two different things) which I will get to in a moment. 

Like it or not, The KKK will always exist, and with it- other groups as well. People in america have the right to share and voice their opinions and others have the right to join them. 

Deep Web vs Dark Web

I think what you are referring to is the Dark Web. Let me show you the difference:

Image result

So to get that out of the way, to access the dark web isn't the easiest thing to do. You need a Tor Browser and going on without a VPN is punishment enough. Its practically impossible on Cellular devices so you're even limited to using a PC. There is no punishment for VISITING the dark web. I would know because before visiting it myself I did a plentiful amount of research. But there is punishment for buying/selling any form of illegal substances/weapons etc such as drugs, guns, body parts, etc. 

There are a lot of government run sites on the Dark Web in attempt to solve part of the issue, but laws with the internet are tricky, and still being sorted out. I can say now with the addition of net neutrality I can firmly say the situation will be way easier handled as individual carriers will block the sites. With that being said


Return To Top | Posted:
2018-04-28 23:20:27
| Speak Round
Cross-Examination
Undovic88: Oh wow cross-examination... fun. I'd say there isnt much we can do without becoming unconstitutional- and there really isnt a way I could change that beleif

Return To Top | Speak Round
Undovic88Undovic88 (CON)
I'd like to add that Caleb Fizzle is clearly inactive so if the judges could ignore the fact that he didn't respond while judging that would be great. I want the winner to be decided on the actual debate.
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-05-13 01:16:31
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2018-06-03 15:07:06
GuitarKirbyJudge: GuitarKirby
Win awarded to: Undovic88
Reasoning:
Con had a far better opening statement and clarified terms much more effectively than Pro, even ignoring the fact that Pro didn't take part after opening statements.

Feedback:
Pro, be present.
Con, good start. I think your opening forgot that the motion was that we should punish users of extremist websites, not deciding on whether their use of websites was already illegal. Still, it was clear and easy to read, and you made good use of visuals to define terms with the Web. Make sure to stay entirely on topic, though I admit it must have been difficult when Pro didn't respond after the first round.
0 comments on this judgement
2018-06-08 03:25:56
ImbsterJudge: Imbster
Win awarded to: Undovic88
Reasoning:
Pro may have painted a nice picture and glimpse of the world but I do not see the pro strengthen his stand to punish users of extremist websites...nor establish that stand. Same goes for Con. A nice rebuttal and informative argument was present against the opening statement. The con has mentioned on punishment for users of the dark web but does not clearly state whether he is against their punishment. Nobody captured the essence of this debate. The con then wins on the basis that the pro has the burden of proof and did not provide evidence of any sort to appeal punishing users of extremist websites. The con shall also be given the win for the con's arguments had more analysis put onto them than the pro's.

Feedback:
Pro:
-Lead the con toward the topic
-Define parameters of debate first
-Strengthen your stand already at 1st round
-Make spot on relevant examples
-Give clear reason and justification already at 1st round
Con:
-Always make statements and arguments against the topic and not only rebut the pro
-Mention and strengthen stand clearly
3 users rated this judgement as constructive
0 comments on this judgement
2018-06-08 16:28:22
WCS7Judge: WCS7
Win awarded to: Undovic88
Reasoning:
His thoughts and logic were clearly organized and his argument well thought-out
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 4 rounds
  • 4000 characters per round
  • No reply speeches
  • Uses cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Unrated debate
  • Time to post: 1 week
  • Time to vote: 2 weeks
  • Time to prepare: 3 hours
This is a random challenge. See the general rules for random challenges at http://www.edeb8.com/resources/General+rules+for+random+debates+%28version+2%29