CreateDebate


Debate Info

16
11
Yes No
Debate Score:27
Arguments:23
Total Votes:34
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (10)
 
 No (6)

Debate Creator

ProLogos(2794) pic



Do cops have the right to kill?

I had to fill both fields.

Yes

Side Score: 16
VS.

No

Side Score: 11

In self-defense and if the suspect represents an immediate danger to others, like in a hostage situation, going on a shooting rampage, etc.

Side: Yes
IAmSparticus(1516) Clarified
0 points

What standard of perception regarding self defense should be used? If the cop believed they were in danger? Or if a "reasonable person" would feel in danger?

Side: Yes
0 points

If a black guy moves his hands at all, that's enough for highfalutin. What does that count as?

Side: Yes
HighFalutin(3402) Clarified
0 points

I think it's cop's standard of perception. They are treated differently because of the line of work they're in.

Side: Yes
1 point

Technically, everybody has the right to kill in self defense. Cops are allowed to kill when their lives are in danger.

Side: Yes
Atrag(5666) Clarified
1 point

You are stating this is the ideal right? Not that this is how you think it is now?

Side: Yes
1 point

The ideal. I think we are letting people claim self defense a little too often.

Side: Yes
1 point

It first of all depends on how you define the word "right". It can be either a legal or moral entitlement. Legally, cops and anyone(where there are stand your ground laws) can kill in self defense against a violent attacker. Morally, I believe the same thing, we can kill to keep us from getting harmed from someone who is using violence.

Side: Yes
1 point

All men (and women) have the right to defend themselves or those they love. If a man is running at a cop or another man or woman he has the right to blow caps into him. However to kill for any other reason then self defense or to execute a serial killer, rightfully so is illegal.

Side: Yes

Yes, with the exception of W.A.S.P.S;- the descendents of, 'White Anglo Saxon Protestants'.

Side: Yes
1 point

You bet they do. When confronted with a kill or be killed situation. Pull the trigger is their response and trained to do so. Now the Democrats have a problem with the police unless they need them in an urgent situation.

Side: Yes
1 point

yes, police can use lethal force. the police have the right to aim fire at a suspect if the suspect is pointing a weapon at an officer, or clenching it and refusing to drop it when an officer clearly demands them to do so. if the suspect is armed however, and threatens an officer in the moment, the officer will tend to think he // she is in danger of death or being harmed in a way, that they will likely shoot the suspect as an act of self defense, and will also honestly believe that such danger exists and or existed.

Side: Yes
2 points

Firstly an interesting question to propose, nice going.

With a question like this clearly we quickly move to the obvious which is killing for self-defense. Let's however look at reality how many times did we agree with store owners when they kill to protect their livelihood? Especially in this day and time how many times do we side with the homeowner who feels someone is lurking around their property once we find out the person was shot.

In this day in time more times than not we accept the word of the killer and more times than not when it's against the police the police are usually the winners. If a suspect is 30 feet away holding a knife are the police justified in killing him? What if a person is having a bad day and compound that with the police having a bad day once gasoline meets with fire somebody dies, is that okay?

Side: No
2 points

more than 100 black man have been killed by cops in 2015 and many of them weren't even charged for the crime. laws are made to protect people but they can be misused against people. Cops are given right to kill that doesn't mean they should kill unarmed person even if he is criminal

Side: No
1 point

In my opinion why don't they just use tasors.

A non lethal non harmful weapon that still temporarily imobalizes criminals.

Side: No
0 points

No one has the right to kill because no one in the first place had the right to live. There is actually no 'right' that says a human is entitled to live, there are rights that (if alive) a human should be certain things such as mentally healthy and fed but the actual killing of a human being is nothing to do with rights, it's to do with a privilege that you have earned or not from the government.

The privilege of killing is earned through practise of martial arts, mental discipline and working as a team to ensure it is the last resort and that the criminal has given no other option unless lives are to be put at risk.

Side: No
SlapShot(2608) Disputed
4 points

Most of your post makes absolutely no sense at all.

There is actually no 'right' that says a human is entitled to live.

You have obviously never read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States, or the Bill of Rights. You seem especially ignorant of the "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness clause.

the actual killing of a human being is nothing to do with rights, it's to do with a privilege that you have earned or not from the government.

Wrong again. Killing a human being, except in times of war or self-defense is a crime. If there is malice aforethought our law calls it premeditated murder. Killing somebody also quite clearly prevents them from securing their Constitutional Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The privilege of killing is earned through practice of martial arts

You also obviously have never studied ANY martial arts. As ANY teacher of ANY of them (with the exception perhaps of Krav Maga) will tell you that ;earning to kill is NOT their primary goal. Nor is it anywhere near the top of the list.

Side: Yes
instig8or(3308) Disputed
2 points

Never said it was the primary goal. There is no law with the word 'right to live' mentioned in it.

Murder of humans are not infringing rights, they are violating laws.

Side: No