It should be Legal to throw acid at women who are Feminists

First of all, I used they because it is a gender neutral term and does not necessarily mean multiple people. I don't know why this was worth mentioning in this debate but I guess Pro just needs something to whine about. My paragraph about the boner was in response to your very, very anti-women, not anti-feminist, paragraph talking about how they let their hair grow out and gain weight. Oh, and I think you'd be very surprised to learn that anti-feminist and misogynists have a lot in common. Especially those that are in favor of terrorist attacks (ie, acid throwing).The next paragraph they (not multiple people you paranoid trash bag) they're upset that a nonviolent, nonproblem like feminism isn't illegal, but something like rape is. I'm sorry? And they also assert that innocent people are arrested too, seemingly enough where this has to be of consideration. Then Pro quotes somebody talking about the failings of the British legal system. Of course, nowhere in there does the quote say that we should get rid of the legal system, or even that these crimes should go unpunished. A very simple, easy reform would be that nonviolent offences or minor offences don't need to be reported when going for a job. Boom.Then they say that laws against rape (WHICH ISN'T PART OF THIS DISCUSSION???) and acid attacks don't make an impact. Of course, they admit that the graph shows a trend of less victims after 2002, but apparently if the law actually worked we would see immediate, drastic decline. Why? Because obviously every single offender would have been arrested immediately following the passing of the law. So what we have here is a graph that shows the number of acid attacks have dropped since a law was passed, and Con's refutation is a conspiracy theory.So Pro goes on to say that the number of acid attacks still occur at similar rates. Where'd he get this? F*ck off and let him speak. Apparently a law against throwing acid on people wouldn't work, but a law against selling these acids would work. Huh. Okay. Oh, and the government should tell the people to do these acid attacks, just with Baby's First Act of Misogynistic Terrorism acid. Honestly, it would make a hell of a lot more sense to deter people from making any sort of attack. Almost... almost like a... law, maybe?So I'm just going to take a little break from my rebuttals to bring up this. The debate is over the legality of throwing acid on feminists. It is not a debate about the effectiveness of the law, whether or not we should have punishment for crimes, or even that the law on acid throwing should be abolished. You have set up a debate to show that it should be legal to throw acid on feminists and feminists only. Therefore, arguing about the effectiveness of the law, or whether it serves as a good deterrent isn't what we are here to talk about. You need to show that there is something about feminists that means we should attack them in ways that would, according to you, be for the purpose of disfiguring them. I would think that in the society you are describing, where feminists deserve to these attacks and it is beneficial to society to do them, I wouldn't say that caring for them afterwards would be of that much importance to people. Why would the police respond to a dirty feminist? Who would even call the police? The attacker? Elliot Rodgers isn't a victim. Elliot Rodgers is a misogynist with a death wish, who felt that he was entitled to women's body by the mere existence of his penis so I guess why his story would matter to you. Oh, and you still give them responsibility because they have to prove that the innocent person that they tried to horribly disfigure was your political opponent. Also my opponent is a psychic because he knows that guns wouldn't be used, acid would be. And I guess not having random victims means... something?So 60% of attacks in Britain are done by males. This is an obvious problem and I don't think that any feminist would shrug their shoulders at it. World Wide, 80% of the victims are female though, which is obviously why they are given more attention. Should more attenton be put towards the problem in Britain? Of course. Frankly, I don't want any person to be attacked with acid, which I thought was just a common decency thing but I guess not. Never did I say that graphs aren't manipulated, but this is a graph that you have given us and when it suits you, you take it as true. Why are the numbers going down? Because acid is regulated! Well who said the numbers are going down? Obviously that graph is manipulated! What Pro Hasn't Told Us--Why feminists deserve this punishment--If negative reinforcement doesn't solve the problem, how would it stop feminists?--If acid attacks are made legal, and these acids are apparently used for many things, what is to stop the use of stronger acids?--How will we identify feminists for future terrorist attacks?