The majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of police racism
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 14 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Resolution: The majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of police racism.
A racial disparity is a statistical disparity between two racial groups that can be caused by a number of factors. The majority will be established as over 50% for this debate. Policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the actions and conduct of the United States police force in interaction with society and the community at large. Police racism is racism committed by the United States police alone pertaining to their actions or conduct/interaction with society at large. This excludes other systems such as the judicial system, beyond the point in which an arrest has been made. With respect to "current," in this debate, police racism can be evaluated from the year 2000 and upwards. Pro argues that these disparities are majorly due to police racism, con argues against this.
The police are the civil force of a national or local government, responsible for the prevention and detection of crime and the maintenance of public order. No other system will be debated in this engagement. Attempting to do so will result in a conduct violation. As a default, sources may not be posed in the comments, and doing so will result in an automatic loss.
Factors or variables outside of racism are factors that are not racism. Racism will be defined as prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized. Our debate places the burden of proof on pro. Conclusively, these definitions set the framework of our debate, and con accepts all terms and definitions upon acceptance of this challenge.
Con waives round one, pro waives round four.
The users FLRW, Shila, and Barney may not vote on this debate.
This is in order to limit the pool of potential voters to those competent.
RationalMadman...I unblocked you weeks ago? [edit] Actually, never-mind, I seem to have forgotten or something.
Take the con side and I'll win if we define systemic racism and blacks having a consistent disadvantage in life in the western world.
What this debate is set up to do is catch someone in a trap where they need to prove that the most severe issue causing police to treat non-whites harsher than whites in the US is active, conscious and wilful racism on their part.
All Con has to do is say it's accidental, unconscious and based on the fact that poor ghetto people are likely to be violent.
Con can push all examples of the same income bracket being treated differently to anomalies etc unless Pro can stack so many and that will drown them in a 10k-only debate where Con get full flexibility.
I am blocked and can't accept it but I'd lose anyway.
If I can’t prove pro, I think basically nobody can prove pro. I might be one of the best researched persons regarding systemic racism on here haha. Not trying to brag too much, just saying. XD