CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS 143Geraldine

Reward Points:7
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:2
Debates:1
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
2 most recent arguments.
1 point

Even though these people did something that had oppressed the laws of the state, it still doesn't mean and it still doesn't give an impression that there is a need to kill these people. It is contrary to the goal of the state which is to cater to its people if we just let these people to get killed, right? The state should also cater to these people and not only to the offended family members of the victim for example. Instead of death penalties, why don't the state put them to jail for an extra year or what not, right? At least at some point, we won't be bias enough to only cater to the victims but to also cater to the ones who did the crime. Crimes should not be paid by death because its already considered a crime because you're killing somebody who's not favorable of your doing, so at the end of the day, it's contrary to the goal of the government and to the laws itself.

1 point

First, urgency of situation:

There are some situations that need long term effects, some don't.

Second, nature of the setting:

In high crime rate areas, people know that it's dangerous for them to go out especially at night time, so they would most likely subscribe to the idea of curfews because they would feel that they would at least be secured if they would know that some people would not roam at night and climb there houses because there's curfew.

Third, Status quo is not enough:

Even though we have policemen, some of them especially in third world countries are not experienced to do tough stuff, so curfews would really work out.

Fourth, it may lead to people being so reliant to it:

People might think that since there are curfews, they could ultimately be safe.


Winning Position: Are curfews the best solution to solve high crime rates in high crime areas?

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here