Can you delegate a right to another individual that you do not have? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the best online debate website. We're the only online debate website with Casual, "Persuade Me," Formalish, Traditional Formal, and Lincoln-Douglas online debate formats. Using DebateIsland's beautiful, mobile-friendly, and easy-to-use online debate website, you can debate politics, debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything in a large community of debaters. Debate online for free using DebateIsland, a globally leading online debate website that is utilizing Artificial Intelligence to transform online debating.


Communities

DebateIsland.com is the best online debate website. We're the only online debate website with Casual, "Persuade Me," Formalish, Traditional Formal, and Lincoln-Douglas online debate formats. Using DebateIsland's beautiful, mobile-friendly, and easy-to-use online debate website, you can debate politics, debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything in a large community of debaters. Debate online for free using DebateIsland, a globally leading online debate website that is utilizing Artificial Intelligence to transform online debating.

Can you delegate a right to another individual that you do not have?

Debate Information

For example, if it is not right to rob your neighbor, is it right for you to have someone else do it?
Debate Details +



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
33%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

    Arguments


  • Depends how you mean.

    If I imprison someone, that's kidnapping and false imprisonment and is illegal.

    If I ask a buddy to imprison someone, that is still kidnapping and false imprisonment and illegal because you can't randomly grant powers .

    However If the state imprisons someone with all relevant actions from individuals like police officers, judges, etc being carried out in accordance with the laws that my elected representatives have helped bring about then that is legal.
  • In principle, in modern democracies all individuals are supposed to be treated as having exactly the same set of right. As such, you cannot really delegate any right to anyone else: if you have it, then they already have it as well, and if you do not have it, then they cannot acquire it.

    You, however, can voluntarily forfeit your rights and hereby give other individual(s) the right to violate them. For example, you can say, "Normally nobody can apply physical violence towards me, but let us do a boxing sparring, and every hit you land on me I consent to".
    But you cannot, say, hire an assassin to kill someone and be devoid of responsibility. And while it is the assassin that will be considered a murderer, you will be an accomplice and might even get a larger sentence than him/her.
  • All right is weighted against wrong. A united state right is a right that applies to something as a complete group, all woman, all men, all children, and any combination of the three. A constitutional right is one that is basic in principle and has a reference to the history of law or court ruling. We can argue a right as a united state on behalf of others explaining the right that is not to be called wrong, or we can argue a constitutional right on behalf of preservation made on basic ideas not complex as the are held in legal history .
  • Kit4179 said:
    For example, if it is not right to rob your neighbor, is it right for you to have someone else do it?

    Yes, a person can delegate a preservation of right to another person. The most well know case of this type right is lethal force in combat. The issue with right is a law can be written with little if any effect on governing changes made from good to bad, or even bad to good.



  • All good answers but when you stop and think about it no one can delegate a 'right' that they do not have to someone else. This is where it tends to go, can a million people delegate a right to someone else that they do not have? We'll say no for the sake of argument (I am talking about taking something that is wrong and turning it into a right, like stealing, but calling it "taxation") and eventually we can ask "where did congress get the 'right' to do anything?"

    What you call something does not change what it actually is. Someone used combat as an example, state sanctioned murder is still murder. So, going to war unless it is in self-defense is wrong.



  • Kit4179 said:
    All good answers but when you stop and think about it no one can delegate a 'right' that they do not have to someone else. This is where it tends to go, can a million people delegate a right to someone else that they do not have? We'll say no for the sake of argument (I am talking about taking something that is wrong and turning it into a right, like stealing, but calling it "taxation") and eventually we can ask "where did congress get the 'right' to do anything?"

    What you call something does not change what it actually is. Someone used combat as an example, state sanctioned murder is still murder. So, going to war unless it is in self-defense is wrong.



    You haven't actually provided a reason why "no one can delegate a 'right'", you've just given your unsupported opinion and have done nothing to explain the obvious examples people have given you of how rights can be delegated.

    The nearest thing you come to a point is your claim that "What you call something does not change what it actually is" but the problem is that things like theft and things like taxation are called different things because they are fundamentally different. There might be one similarity of you losing money, but that applies to a whole host of things (e.g. I lose money when I buy something from a shop) and there are a whole host of differences namely:

    - One is an illegal act that involves someone using force or cunning to take money in a manner that is disapproved of by society and has been outlawed.
    - One is a legal act involving money being taken in a manner that has been sanctioned by society.

    If you don't like taxation, just come out and say it. Don't pretend that it's identical to theft, because you know as well as I do that if you gave people $1000 to correctly identify which of the above descriptions applies to theft and which applies to taxation, you know as well as I do 100% of them would get it right because there are fundamental differences about how and why the money is taken.

    You've already conceded that self-defence does not count as murder despite the end result being the same, so you have already implicitly conceded this argument.

    Also just to get you thinking; what do you think makes rights matter other than that they are agreed upon by society as a whole via whatever political system is in place? How can rights matter in any meaningful way if you basically want to be able to pick and choose them at will while other people might want to pick and choose other rights? It destroys the whole concept of them being a meaningful distinction and waters them down into mere opinions.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 913 Pts
    edited February 6
    Ummmm, why? Did you have something nefarious in mind? Whatever it is, I implore you to not!!!!!!
  • I posted a link to a video that goes more in depth towards what I was saying. It is about eight minutes long. I stand with what is said in the video:
    https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IcZQc5zAM4
  • Kit4179 said:
    I posted a link to a video that goes more in depth towards what I was saying. It is about eight minutes long. I stand with what is said in the video:
    https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IcZQc5zAM4
    The thing is you and the video are wrong if you think that's how things are now (obviously there are a whole host of laws which restrict what people can do) and it gives no rationale for why it is preferable to what we have at the moment. Simply shouting about how jail is slavery and taxes are theft isn't an argument, it's semantics. There is literally no reason in anything that's been posted to think people can't or shouldn't impose upon others.
  • Ampersand said:

    The thing is you and the video are wrong if you think that's how things are now (obviously there are a whole host of laws which restrict what people can do) and it gives no rationale for why it is preferable to what we have at the moment. 
    It's not semantics it is a form of written grievance. By way of argument how slavery is in fact still capable to be found as legal. In contradiction to unconstitutional law. Taxation and theft is more tricky as we are addressing costs in a united state created by the public, can taxation be a 2nd amendment arm brought to bear against a person is the debate.
  • John_C_87 said:
    Ampersand said:

    The thing is you and the video are wrong if you think that's how things are now (obviously there are a whole host of laws which restrict what people can do) and it gives no rationale for why it is preferable to what we have at the moment. 
    It's not semantics it is a form of written grievance. By way of argument how slavery is in fact still capable to be found as legal. In contradiction to unconstitutional law. Taxation and theft is more tricky as we are addressing costs in a united state created by the public, can taxation be a 2nd amendment arm brought to bear against a person is the debate.
    It's a completely semantic argument. You're simply calling taxation theft with no reference to the actual qualitative differences between the two.

    Let's run a thought experiment.

    A person stops you while you're walking home and tries to grab your wallet and run off with it. What do you do. Punch them? Call the police? Both?

    Now what would you do if you look at your paycheck and money has been taken out of it as income tax. What would you do. Would you punch your employer? Call the police and say you've been robber? Both? No, of course not.

    You would act completely different in both situations because they are completely different types of event, despite having the one similarity of you losing money. Taxation is not theft, it's just something you don't like.
    Plaffelvohfen
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch