January/February LD Topic: Deadly force as a deliberate response to cases of domestic violence

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief, 85% of domestic violence victims are women. "Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion... in private self-defense." John Adams (2nd US President) I stand in affirmation of the Resolved: It is morally permissible for victims to use deadly force as a deliberate response to repeated domestic violence. I will now provide some definitions to clarify the debate today. All Definitions are from Merriam Webster unless otherwise noted Morally: In relation to standards of good and bad character or conduct Permissible: That may be accepted or conceded Victim: A person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action Deadly force: Deadly force, as defined by the United States Armed Forces, is the force in which a person uses, causing or that a person knows, or should know, would create a substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily harm. Response: something constituting a reply or a reaction Repeated: Done or occurring again several times in the same way Domestic violence: The inflicting of physical injury by one family or household member on another; a repeated or habitual pattern of such behavior My paramount Value in Today's round is Justice. We must uphold justice in this debate round. Justice is defined as being based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair. When we look to what is morally permissible we must also look to justice and whether or not we are upholding it. (Oxford Dictionary) My value criterion for today's debate will be Morality. Morality is the goodness or rightness of an action through a balance of deontology and consequentialism. Therefore, that which is moral, both in principle and in consequence, upholds justice. Contention 1: Domestic violence is prevalent and devastating. There are 16,800 homicides and 2.2 million medically treated injuries due to intimate partner violence annually, which costs $37 billion. Jonathan Abel, from the St Petersburg Times, 2008, reports on Domestic Violence, The true frequency of domestic violence cannot be tracked. According to Judith Koons, an associate Professor of Law at Barry University school of law. EVERY NINE SECONDS A HUSBAND ABUSES A WIFE IN AMERICA. This does not even take into consideration those not in relationships or other family members. In a broader sense, the National Family Violence Study, sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health, estimates that 188,000 women per year are battered severely enough to require medical attention. Moreover, the FBI estimates that 1,400 women were killed by their spouses or partners in 1992 alone. The problem of battered women, while perhaps not accurately quantifiable, is quite grave. In 1992, domestic violence was the leading cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44 in the United States, more than car accidents, muggings, and rapes combined. Battery tends to increase and become more violent over time. Children who witness violence at home display emotional and behavioral disturbances as diverse as withdrawal, low self-esteem, nightmares, self-blame and aggression against peers, family members and property. Domestic violence has horrendous consequences. Therefore, if a victim uses deadly force to protect him or herself then the victim and society as a whole will be benefited, yielding a greater benefit consequentially. Contention Two: Oftentimes victims have no other options. According to Clark County and Domestic and Sexual Violence Services; The danger to a victim increases by 70% when she attempts to leave, as the abuser escalates his use of violence when he begins to lose control. In 2009, Nancy, Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School of Law wrote that most victims of domestic abuse syndrome come to feel that they are trapped into remaining with their abusers. When in desperation, often after many years of abuse, they take matters into their own hands and kill their abusers. Obviously, in the ideal world the battering would never have been allowed to escalate to the point where killing the abuser would appear to be the only way out to the abuse victim. In an ideal world, there would not be wars. In an ideal world, poverty, famine, sickness, starvation… all of these would not exist. In an ideal world. We live in a broken world, where sometimes people have to decisions in the time it takes to snap one's fingers. We do not live in an ideal world. According to Elisabeth, The American University Journal of Gender & the Law, 1995, "The battered woman may not be able to confront the batterer without a deadly weapon because of disparities in size, strength or emotional control. The lower degree of force a woman typically exerts upon a man may have little or no impact on a physically stronger abuser. Indeed, a woman's lesser degree of force may only incite a vicious retaliation by the abuser." Once the violence begins, the woman may be too heavily invested in the relationship to leave or optimistic that they can turn things around. Christine Gilfillan, on August 22, 2010 wrote: "We want to believe that we can put the relationship back together, and we want to believe their promises that 'this won't happen again. Sometimes things get better. And Sometimes they don't." Abusers can isolate victims, reducing their power to leave, said Grace Hill, associate director of the Women's Center at Kutztown University. The women may not know where else to go, may not be able to afford to leave or may have children with the abuser, she said. The women also might be scared to break things off, and sometimes with good reason, Gilfillan said. It's difficult to predict which relationship might turn deadly, said Daniel P. Billings, director of security at St. Joseph Medical Center, a former Wyomissing police officer and domestic violence expert. " When an abuse victim uses deadly force in response to domestic violence their intention is to stop the abuse. Just as in war, where fighting for one's country is morally permissible because one is protecting the well-being of others, an individual should be given the moral "green light" to defend themselves when they deem it to be necessary, as their action is moral on the deontological side (an intent to defend one's self), and the consequential side (no more abuse and alleviation of an economic burden). Therefore, it is morally permissible for a victim of repeated domestic violence to use deadly force as a deliberate response. (Approx. 6 minutes) Ask questions if you want for your next round.