Juvenalia

Last night we dug deeply into the new resolution. I share the following with you (and, yeah, I mean you, you base spalpeen) in the hopes that it will increase the quality of your discourse. Although honestly, there won't be much debating of this sucker by the Jolly Tars. I mean, there's Grands, of course, but States doesn't look likely (they've got no judge) and, well, Districts is just filler...

So anyhow, first there's the question of what a juvenile actually is. In a round, there should be no question about the existence of same. Society clearly defines juveniles for all sorts of activities (voting, marriage, driving, drinking, etc.), so there's no great claim that the state of not being an adult doesn't exist or is somehow culturally insignificant. Arguments that hinge on your somehow changing on your 18th birthday are, in a word, inane. The rez is not asking if you change your stripes on a birthday, or if you're a chrysalis emerging on some pre-ordained day on which you are capable of emergence. Society makes this sort of arbitrary determination every day, you chump, because it has no mechanism to do otherwise. Nor is the rez asking us to evaluate if 8-year-olds should be tried as adults, because we don't need any evidence whatsoever to know that 8-year-olds are not adults. The rez wants to know what to do about that indeterminate group, viz., teenagers. They seem to be capable of taking responsibility for their actions. But are they indeed fully responsible? That's what you should be arguing. Anything else is just sophistry, and not even good sophistry at that.

We talked a lot about the difference of the juvenile justice system and the adult justice system. And the natures of tried and punished, both of which are required by the rez. We talked about the relevant cases in the US (e.g. Roper) and how, I guess, the US is presently neg (which says nothing about either side being right or wrong). We pointed out why the topic, while not referring specifically to the US, should be argued in a US context (because reasonable discourse on the subject requires knowledge of the concepts of "tried and punished," which one can only conclude will arise if we concentrate on the US; if one side talks about Ugabugaland, and the other side talks about Ix, there is no reasonable discourse possible because there is no common ground, but once reasonable discourse DOES ensue, then that discourse's conclusions can be applied to any arena). But mostly we thought about what makes all the people on the team different from me. Seriously. They're all juveniles; I'm not. So, what is it about them that theoretically makes them less culpable for their crimes. Answer that question well, and you win the aff. Disprove the statement, and you win the neg. And lordy lordy, this is one evidential topic, because intuitively I look at two debaters standing there arguing with (at least some) maturity about whether or not they are mature, and I believe completely that they are easily capable of understanding culpability, so you'd better have some serious facts or figures to overcome not my prejudice but the immediate clear evidence of my eyes and ears.

Anyhow, I'll send out the old background info tonight over the listserver. I won't update from the old JJ topic, since there really isn't much difference. There are some references and links in my notes that are outdated, though, and I will expunge them. And you, you spalpeen, now know how to think about Mar-Apr, so you can save a few bucks buying old cases from LOL. Hell, I'll send you my notes for nothing if you want more (and I even include a bunch of case positions, among which the Empty-V is a classic pre-pomo from back in the day when bizarre cases were a noteworthy event).