LMS Debate: solemnsauce vs Kai. Should a world court be formed...
Options
Comments
-
aight she done...someone up da list..vote people so we can move on
-
Sorry guys, I had a exam study session to TA, just getting finished. Do I still need to make more posts or is it finished?
-
Good ? Solemn.
-
2stepz_ahead wrote: »winners in bold
@yellowtapesport vs @SimptimusLEMZUS
@atribecalledgabi vs @CeLLaR-DooR
@mryounggun vs @Preach2Teach
@BOSSExcellence vs @Young_Chitlin
@Lou_Cypher vs @zzombie
@Stiff vs @Figo
@SolemnSauce vs @Kai
@obnoxiouslyfresh vs @Sion
@b'mer vs @MistyKnight
@SuperSoaker vs @Paprika
@NeighborhoodNomad. vs @AggyAF
score is us-3 the world-3
What's the topics -
@Kai
that was you last post...now we can take it to the judges
@AP21 @Bussy_Getta" @Copper @Arya Tsaddiq @_Goldie_SolemnSauce wrote: »Simply put, a world court is a bad idea. And its shown clearly in America with laws like stop and frisk, and stand your ground.
Or like in my own state where its a law where you cant dance on the court steps on a sunday.
Imagine if you visited my state not knowing that law and did a dance for a vine video and got arrested and prosecuted even though you are from out of state and didnt know that absurd law.
Not to metion the countless laws overseas which the other debate team may know, that would seem nonsensical to my counterparts and I here in the states.
Clearly put, deportation and bans from coutries on the face of crimes outside of murder and thief, which are based on morals and not legal anywhere, should be the main actions when it comes to crimes outside of you home country.Yes because it is the only way to prosecute things like war crimes that really have no jurisdiction. It also had the precedent set by things like the international court of justice and the international military tribunal, the latter of which oversaw the Nuremberg trials.
World courts are necessary for global scale crimes such human sex trafficking or war crimes or in other instances where issues of jurisdictional overlapping would otherwise result in non prosecution or lengthy legal entanglements
World courts could also increase the efficacy and purpose of global bodies like the UN by making their conventions and accords enforceable and legally binding which they are not currently. Essentially world courts would be used to prosecute crimes against humanity on a global scale
-
SolemnSauce wrote: »The argument you are making is placing alot of power in the hands of bureaucracies ,that have shown that they can be easily influenced by politics. A world court would have made it so edward snowden couldnt have exposed what he did about my own goverment in the states. Or the corruption julian assange exposed with world goverments.
Since we are on a hiphop message board, think of a man like Freddie Gibbs, think about how hiphop has taken hold in places in Europe where they want to make cases against immigration from Afican Countries. You dont think having Gibbs, a major black artist from the states where hiphop was created. As the poster boy for how they feel poltically about blacks wouldnt have been a place to make a statement?
You yourself are in threads on this same forum condemning the actions of police and goverment. And know you want to put more power and faith in a world goverment to do as they are supposed to. Was the cop who shot walter scott supposed to fire on him as he ran? Were the cops who murdered freddie gray supposed to get off based on the fact that they are "law enforcement"?
Where would be the checks and balances to a world court? Who elects those that judge? Which country has the most influcence on what the sentences would be? Why would an anverage Englishman cares about what happens to a blackman not from his country if the narrative is that he is a career criminal in the states.
Nevermind that he may have left the states to be a contractor abroad because his felon title prevented him from getting a job in the states.I would argue counter to your points about police brutality that a world court system would be a much better method to achieve justice because from what we can see black people aren't getting much justice now. For example, police officers are rarely if ever charged or prosecuted because of the ? buddies system of federal and lower court justice, where prosecutors who are usually on the side of the victim are placed in a conflict of interest because the police are more usually than not their allies
They collude with the police and are on the same side of the adversarial approach to justice in every other insurance where the defendant is not police. So it should and had come as no surprise that police officers are rarely charged or at most are tried in bungled persecutions set up get them off. That is not justice
A world court system would remove this bias because the prosecutors would not be the good friend of the police officer that had worked with her or she on a multitude of cases. It would be an impartial third party. A world court would also eliminate the technicalities police get off on such as fear for ones own life "forcing" the officer to react in a deadly manner if such matters were prosecuted as violations of human rights
World courts could also be used to challenge things like whether it is a violation of human rights to not have de-escelation tactics or have shoot to ? procedures in place.
-
SolemnSauce wrote: »All of that said and our police and goverment arent even the most corupt in the world. You just put our goverment as an example of what goes wrong in the court system its not even the worst.
Thats like saying the we cant trust the semi smartest kid on the short bus to not start fires, so lets trust the dumbest kid on the short bus to do so. For what america is, many people who have been in the military can tell you its still like the stoneage in many places of the world compared to America. But lets trust a collective for those goverments to make choices on citizens who dont orginate from those places.
Why not, I mean America went to war on the bases of 911. But when John Stewert went to congress to help pass the 911 bill to help families affected by 911. He was met with road block after road block. Because even tho its open and shut, many members of the goverment who morally should have an obligation to push this through immediately, said.
Well this is open and shut, let me add money into this bill for ? in my state so i can use federal funds to pay for ? in my state and make me look like im a good politician so i can keep my job. Then someone would fight that action and it became fight after fight after fight. Till it took months for something thats open and shut. And again, morally how could you do something like that, takes a evil self centered person to do such things
And like i said, "OUR GOVERNMENT ISNT EVEN THE MOST CORUPT". Yet you trust that system initally set up only to prosecute war crimes and things like sex trafficking, for one. Will stay only as the judge and jury for only those things. Two, wont be at all politically movatived to do whats not morally right. And three, wont try to expand their powers beyond what their main cause was and is?
Thats how we got federal taxes, thats how the partiot act allowed you phone and internet to be tapped, thats how states are allowed to Annex private property that you own to build a freeway in your back yard. Power breeds coruption, but you trust other countries with more power when the examples of what it does are right in your face.A world court is not other countries in the sense that it is an impartial system of appointed officials capable their apt fields. This could include human rights attorneys, judges learned in cases of relevance.
You're arguments are nonsensical and all over the place. You seem to be saying that since there is corruption in government that higher levels have higher amounts and that all other countries are more corrupt than the US. None of these claims have you or can you prove.
A world court could have no standing in matters that lie within the jurisdiction of a state or country. The purpose a world court is not to override the laws of a given state or country, but to provide a legal framework in places where jurisdiction is up for contention. For example, an Australian man who committed sex crimes in the Philippines let's say, could not be tried in Australia for those crimes but could in the Philippines where he is much more likely to bribe his way out of it. Criminals like him could be tried in a world court for violating the human rights of the children he assaulted.
-
SolemnSauce wrote: »A world court is not other countries in the sense that it is an impartial system of appointed officials capable their apt fields. This could include human rights attorneys, judges learned in cases of relevance.
You're arguments are nonsensical and all over the place. You seem to be saying that since there is corruption in government that higher levels have higher amounts and that all other countries are more corrupt than the US. None of these claims have you or can you prove.
A world court could have no standing in matters that lie within the jurisdiction of a state or country. The purpose a world court is not to override the laws of a given state or country, but to provide a legal framework in places where jurisdiction is up for contention. For example, an Australian man who committed sex crimes in the Philippines let's say, could not be tried in Australia for those crimes but could in the Philippines where he is much more likely to bribe his way out of it. Criminals like him could be tried in a world court for violating the human rights of the children he assaulted.
That already happens Kai, extradition happens on a federal level when its requested by the country that that person return to their home country to face persecution for crimes commited in that country. Say they commited crimes in Australia and fled to the Phillipines. And thats a whole nother subject.
I dont think you understand the concept of what a world court would be. It would be a centralized location of judges in an appointed legal system based on global law. Like the star fleet in star trek, you are arguing for a system that is already in place.
And as far as the US not being the most corrupt. Why do you think jobs are shipped over seas, cause the CEO's like to vactation? Its because corrupt goverments have corrupt laws that we dont have and wont fly in the US. Like basic child labor laws.SolemnSauce wrote: »See Sion, the problem is..it aint what you know, its what you can prove. She cant prove any of her points because evidence elsewhere proves them to be false. So i based my attack on the fact that..aight prove it. But she was focused on showing what she knows. Displaying her intelligence with the use of big words, that most ? in awe of off the strength. Take away the complex way in the way she structures it..its really just a bunch of..it would be good because good people would hold bad people accountable. Evidence proves theres alot more bad people in the court systems than good.
and thats my final post 2 stepsSolemnSauce wrote: »A world court is not other countries in the sense that it is an impartial system of appointed officials capable their apt fields. This could include human rights attorneys, judges learned in cases of relevance.
You're arguments are nonsensical and all over the place. You seem to be saying that since there is corruption in government that higher levels have higher amounts and that all other countries are more corrupt than the US. None of these claims have you or can you prove.
A world court could have no standing in matters that lie within the jurisdiction of a state or country. The purpose a world court is not to override the laws of a given state or country, but to provide a legal framework in places where jurisdiction is up for contention. For example, an Australian man who committed sex crimes in the Philippines let's say, could not be tried in Australia for those crimes but could in the Philippines where he is much more likely to bribe his way out of it. Criminals like him could be tried in a world court for violating the human rights of the children he assaulted.
That already happens Kai, extradition happens on a federal level when its requested by the country that that person return to their home country to face persecution for crimes commited in that country. Say they commited crimes in Australia and fled to the Phillipines. And thats a whole nother subject.
I dont think you understand the concept of what a world court would be. It would be a centralized location of judges in an appointed legal system based on global law. Like the star fleet in star trek, you are arguing for a system that is already in place.
If it already exists how can you argue that it shouldn't, your argument is already defeat if you are admitting that it exists. What I'm arguing for us an expansion on the precedent set by things like the international crime court.And as far as the US not being the most corrupt. Why do you think jobs are shipped over seas, cause the CEO's like to vactation? Its because corrupt goverments have corrupt laws that we dont have and wont fly in the US. Like basic child labor laws.
Jobs are shipped oversees not because of corruption but because of greed and the fact that big corporations want to outsource the jobs to countries where workers make slave wages
A world court could actually work to put an end to things like sweat shops and child labor which could benefit people two fold. Corporations would be forced to pay people a living wage and keep jobs in America since the incentive outsource had been eliminated, and the poorest of the poor get raised or of poverty
Unless you just don't want international crimes prosecuted there is no reason to be against a world court system, especially since you've already admitted we have something similar in place already
-
captians pick2stepz_ahead wrote: »winners in bold
@yellowtapesport vs @SimptimusLEMZUS
@atribecalledgabi vs @CeLLaR-DooR
@mryounggun vs @Preach2Teach
@BOSSExcellence vs @Young_Chitlin
@Lou_Cypher vs @zzombie
@Stiff vs @Figo
@SolemnSauce vs @Kai
@obnoxiouslyfresh vs @Sion
@b'mer vs @MistyKnight
@SuperSoaker vs @Paprika
@NeighborhoodNomad. vs @AggyAF
score is us-3 the world-3
What's the topics -
2stepz_ahead wrote: »
captians pick2stepz_ahead wrote: »winners in bold
@yellowtapesport vs @SimptimusLEMZUS
@atribecalledgabi vs @CeLLaR-DooR
@mryounggun vs @Preach2Teach
@BOSSExcellence vs @Young_Chitlin
@Lou_Cypher vs @zzombie
@Stiff vs @Figo
@SolemnSauce vs @Kai
@obnoxiouslyfresh vs @Sion
@b'mer vs @MistyKnight
@SuperSoaker vs @Paprika
@NeighborhoodNomad. vs @AggyAF
score is us-3 the world-3
What's the topics
Is there a pool of topics -
common stocks or mutual funds ? Which is the better investment alternative ?
Thats the next subject -
SimptimusLEMZUS wrote: »common stocks or mutual funds ? Which is the better investment alternative ?
Thats the next subject
wow......i see you lem
@yellowtapesport what side you taking -
I'm gonna need some time with this one.
-
man if yall ? dont get the ? outta here..what yall need time for? -
Ight...
So I've read each response a few times. And im going to vote for @SolemnSauce as the winner. I want to properly explain why I chose him, but ill have to do that a little later. -
Arya Tsaddiq wrote: »Ight...
So I've read each response a few times. And im going to vote for @SolemnSauce as the winner. I want to properly explain why I chose him, but ill have to do that a little later.
-
aye bruh, u aint gotta explain ?
-
SolemnSauce wrote: »aye bruh, u aint gotta explain ?
I aint gotta do nothing but be black and die.
But for real, you made some points that @Kai didn't counter thoroughly IMO...
Example:SolemnSauce wrote: »......
Where would be the checks and balances to a world court? Who elects those that judge? Which country has the most influcence on what the sentences would be? Why would an anverage Englishman cares about what happens to a blackman not from his country if the narrative is that he is a career criminal in the states.
......
This was a BIG question that needed answers. Because Germs major focus was the issue of "government" corruption. He provide examples of it in action. How would the standard be set? How would these governing bodies be elected if at all elected. Checks and Balances would be absolutely necessary.
@kai response wasA world court is not other countries in the sense that it is an impartial system of appointed officials capable their apt fields. This could include human rights attorneys, judges learned in cases of relevance.
That would be good....but....how?
And this was the killer....SolemnSauce wrote: »All of that said and our police and goverment arent even the most corupt in the world. You just put our goverment as an example of what goes wrong in the court system its not even the worst.
Thats like saying the we cant trust the semi smartest kid on the short bus to not start fires, so lets trust the dumbest kid on the short bus to do so. For what america is, many people who have been in the military can tell you its still like the stoneage in many places of the world compared to America. But lets trust a collective for those goverments to make choices on citizens who dont orginate from those places.
Why not, I mean America went to war on the bases of 911. But when John Stewert went to congress to help pass the 911 bill to help families affected by 911. He was met with road block after road block. Because even tho its open and shut, many members of the goverment who morally should have an obligation to push this through immediately, said.
Well this is open and shut, let me add money into this bill for ? in my state so i can use federal funds to pay for ? in my state and make me look like im a good politician so i can keep my job. Then someone would fight that action and it became fight after fight after fight. Till it took months for something thats open and shut. And again, morally how could you do something like that, takes a evil self centered person to do such things
And like i said, "OUR GOVERNMENT ISNT EVEN THE MOST CORUPT". Yet you trust that system initally set up only to prosecute war crimes and things like sex trafficking, for one. Will stay only as the judge and jury for only those things. Two, wont be at all politically movatived to do whats not morally right. And three, wont try to expand their powers beyond what their main cause was and is?
Thats how we got federal taxes, thats how the partiot act allowed you phone and internet to be tapped, thats how states are allowed to Annex private property that you own to build a freeway in your back yard. Power breeds coruption, but you trust other countries with more power when the examples of what it does are right in your face.
-
2stepz_ahead wrote: »SimptimusLEMZUS wrote: »common stocks or mutual funds ? Which is the better investment alternative ?
Thats the next subject
wow......i see you lem
@yellowtapesport what side you taking
Before I pick a side @2stepz_ahead my question is for @Sion
U been sideline cheerleading the WHOLE GOTDAMN debate...BUT
U REALLY REALLY wanna cherry-pick ur topic my ? ???
Man up and pick a neutral topic if ur debate game really on point
Ol head start ass ? -
-
we talkin bout PimPin and polygamy my next debates!!
? that! -
yellowtapesport wrote: »2stepz_ahead wrote: »SimptimusLEMZUS wrote: »common stocks or mutual funds ? Which is the better investment alternative ?
Thats the next subject
wow......i see you lem
@yellowtapesport what side you taking
Before I pick a side @2stepz_ahead my question is for @Sion
U been sideline cheerleading the WHOLE GOTDAMN debate...BUT
U REALLY REALLY wanna cherry-pick ur topic my ? ???
Man up and pick a neutral topic if ur debate game really on point
Ol head start ass ?
Throwing rocks and hiding ya hands now are we ? Stop it fam LOLOLOL. You guys did it with the DC debate, you knew full and dayum well Preach wasn't even from there or that he'd have any understanding of U.S. states. But you knew Goldie (a judge) was from there and that it was a topic mryounggun knew well - you had 2 advantages going in. I peeped game from time, you opened Pandora's box. I aint complain cuz I get it it's a competition.
Don't cry foul now. If we win we can pick the topic and the loser chooses sides. Those are the rules and we're biding by them. Why would we give you an inch to kick us with when we have the chance to choose ? Doesn't make sense. We're playing to win. Do your research like Preach did and come prepared.
@teamamerica pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew -
Crickets from Team America
-
-
Yo and if memory serves mryounggun is from DC too... Yall knew what you were doing don't act brand new
Ya memory failed you, fan. I'm from Atlanta and spent the last 13 years in Cali.
