Leave Justin Bieber Alone

In my previous round I stated that "My opponent 's allegation is that the neighbor[whose house was egged] was lying," My opponent replied by saying " I did not mean to make it seem like I was saying that the egging incident was all a lie. For the most part, that was sarcasm". My opponent has dismissed his/her false allegations as sarcasm, whether this is a lie or not, I would like to point out that it is inappropriate to use sarcasm in debates, especially because it is practically impossible to know whether someone is being sarcastic or not when typing since emotions cannot be seen. "The damage did not look that severe to cost 20,000."-pro Justin Bieber is rich, as my opponent said ("he has an immense amount of money"). If the fine was the same that would be imposed for a regular person, it would not seem much to Justin Bieber since he is rich and he will just keep on egging houses since he can just keep paying the fine, the same reason why in most countries, the rich have a higher tax rate than the poor. Also Justin verbally abused the neighbor (with swear words). " I do not believe it needed that much media attention seeing how it's not even that big of a deal."-pro But he DOES deserve media attention for getting committing crime, or even just getting accused of crimes. Hence Pro's resolution that Justin Bieber should be left alone is inadequately justified. I will concede that Justin Bieber should receive LESS attention for his alleged crimes, but at the same time he SHOULD NOT be left alone for him to vandalize and abuse as he pleases. Hence the resolution of "Leave Justin Bieber alone" should not come into place. Justin Bieber kicked the Argentinean flag offstage during a performance in Buenos Aires. This is punishable in Argentina with four years in prison, another crime by Justin Bieber. http://news.sky.com... Pro stated in the closing argument that ( I also do not intend to win, since just about everyone in the world hates Justin Bieber right now.) Cheer up! Its not all about winning, besides whether they agree with me or not, the debate can go either way. Since maybe you made more convincing arguments, had more better grammar (I did that on purpose) and had used more reliable sources (unbiased perhaps). Voters agreeing with one side or the other does not give points to either side so do not worry! :) However, I am not conceding the debate. I shall now persuade voters to vote for me. - GRAMMAR- Is tied - RELIABLE SOURCES- It is up to the voters to evaluate our sources, in terms of reliability. But I used more sources hence, I appeal to voters to vote for con. -CONDUCT- Pro used Sarcasm (or lied) hence I appeal to voters to vote for me. -CONVINCING ARGUMENTS- Once again, I appeal to voters to vote for me since I have sufficiently rebutted Pro's arguments and that I have proved the validity of opposing this resolution. Since leaving Justin Bieber alone (which is an absolute statement) would mean that he can keep vandalizing property among other alleged crimes (some of which are actually true) without harm. Vote for Con! :) P.S. to voters - Please do not take away points from my opponent if the ONLY reason is that you 'hate' Justin Bieber, as that is extremely unfair to my opponent and it is not really a true victory for me.