I'm watching Dateline.. It's about a murder, of course.. I notice
that cops make SERIOUS decisions about their investigation BASED on the
BEHAVIOR of the suspect... If they don't act contrite enough, they're
SUSPECT.. If they don't CRY enough, they're SUSPECT.. If they don't
exhibit what the cop THINKS is proper behavior after some serious event,
I'm NOT an especially emotional person.. After some event, I MIGHT not
exhibit a lot of sorrow. Should that make me a SUSPECT??excon
Do you believe that 'fighting' sports should be outlawed?
MMA, Boxing and all those shenanigan to portray raw violence as something beautiful... If you kill the opponent, it's LITERALLY legalised murder. It's not like a soldier killing an enemy combatant because that's legally not called murder to begin with but basically this is legalising assault, battery and potentially murder...It is brutal, disgusting... I tell the truth... I support banning this in their entirety. If my son wants to be a drug dealer, I will be happier than if he wants to be a professional fighter who ends up breathing through a straw for doing his f***ing job.Sorry but the world is utterly stupid to glorify this stuff. I don't care if my own best friend or family member likes it or does it... I will tell them to their face how idiotic the industry is and barbaric the entire concept is.
I have yet to hear a logical argument in support of gun free zones. Personally, I think you may as well put up a sign that says 'The occupants of this designated area have been rendered defenseless for the convenience of any passing armed psychopath, who otherwise won't give a shit what's printed on this piece of metal- you're going to be dead in twenty minutes after somebody finally shows up to shoot back at you, why do you care about jail time or a fine?'. Change my mind.
If all decisions... All actions, inactions, assumptions and conclusions are inevitable and furthermore inescapable then why hold anyone accountable for immorality? They couldn't help it, they inevitably had to do so as their will isn't free enough to escape their predetermined thought process.
is, I don't know what sexual harassment IS. Have I put my hand on a
ladies breast UNINVITED??? I HAVE.. In fact, I've NEVER been invited
to touch a ladies breast.. In intimate circumstances, I do it until
I'm told NO. Or, that's WRONG.. See?? I told you that I don't know what it is..excon
So first off, drug testing is when they have you pee in a cup and test if you've been taking drugs. There have been court issues where people are saying it violates they're 4th and 5th amendment rights.
The 8th amendment protects people from "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" and "excessive fines, bail, and punishment". But "Excessive" or "Cruel and Unusual" is not clearly defined. What is your definition?
There has been a lot of controversy over whether to keep the 2nd Amendment law, that allows people to hold and buy guns for self defense. Some people think it protects them from criminals, but others think that it just makes crimes easier to make. What do you think?My opinion is that in many places, guns are necessary to stay safe, especially in cities with high levels of violence. But there should be tighter restrictions on what guns they are allowed to buy, and which people are allowed to buy them.
A bit of a vague question yes, but I will try to explain.Inspiration for this debate came from Bronto's debate titled: *"Should a Muslim have to bake a cake for a gay wedding."* I think this raises a question about the value of freedom. Should freedom (e.g. freedom not to serve somebody) in some cases be sacrificed to create something else that many would deem to be good, such as forced fair treatment (forcing the Muslim to serve the gays)? Do we overate freedom? This could also apply to things like limitations on government surveillance upon the public. The specific dialogue during Bronto's debate that inspired me to create this debate was between Amarel and myself, which went like this:Me: "Nobody should have to provide a service unwillingly if freedom is to be considered valuable"Amarel: "Does that include denial of service based on race. ?"Me: "If you value freedom enough, yes. The value of freedom is the real debate though."Amarel: "Sounds like it might be. Why don't you post a debate. ?"
it you see a dog in a front garden and did not know the owner and did not ask for permission from the owner should it be illegal to take a photo that focuses on the animal (a photo that focuses on the dog is were if just the dog and if it doesnt it wouldjust be in the back round