Resolved: The United States ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers.
When this topic was announced in June, I was ready to dust off my copy of Radly Balko's The Rise of the Warrior Cop, and tell the young'uns to start prepping their affs. Since then, events in Dallas and Baton Rouge have caused the public debate to degenerate into #blacklivesmatter vs #bluelivesmatter. Although I believe that our young'uns will be more civil and logical than the folks who currently engage in public discourse about the issue, our young'uns will be relying on some of their information, and those articles will likely generate more heat than light.
This resolution, like many others proposed this year, has policy phrasing. This particular resolution dares/begs/cajoles/demands/craves/desires/needs a solvency mechanism. LD debate as done is South Dakota doesn't demand a plan, so it's going to be really difficult to provide show that solvency will happen if qualified immunity is limited. Police department reviews will still happen; some will be cover-ups. From Rodney King on, communities have been upset with juries' decisions to limit punishment or prosecutors' refusing to indict. Limiting qualified immunity will not change juries or prosecutors.
I will post my final ranking after I finish these quick overviews, but I will likely vote for this one in the March/April or September/October lists, the ones that we don't debate.
1 comment:
The current nature of this resolution makes it very appealing. We can get our students into topics more easily if they are relevant to what is going on. I think a debate on police conduct is needed and debate can facilitate this. I see good value positions for both sides and both sides have real truths they can argue. I like this one.
Post a Comment