Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The evidentiary difficulty of proving a crime is a reason to reform investigative procedures, not to decriminalize the underlying conduct.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Some conduct's evidentiary difficulty reflects its genuinely private/consensual nature; criminalizing the unverifiable harms liberty.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Procedural reforms can enable false convictions and rights violations; decriminalization prevents this category of injustice entirely.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If conduct cannot reliably be proven in practice despite real effort, criminalization creates arbitrary enforcement based on investigator luck.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Decriminalization abandons victims and rule of law; better procedures serve justice without sacrificing accountability.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Procedural reform is feasible (improved forensics, surveillance, witness protocols) while decriminalization is irreversible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Proof difficulty often reflects resource constraints, not inherent unmeasurable wrongdoing, so reform targets the real problem.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42