Case

[Yanny]

Ok… in a constant struggle to improve my debating skills (I’ve made it my personal mission over the next 3 and a half years to put Providence College on the debating map), I’d like to try something out here.

Disclaimer: Try not to bring personal views into this debate. I’m looking for arguements to counter my arguements. So, pick a side to the arguement and defend your stance.

This case almost got me into the novice playoffs at my second debate in a stacked tournament. I’m looking to improve upon it to eliminate the “almost”.

Mr. Speaker, you are a bank robber. You and your partner have been robbing banks for years together. Unfortunately, you two have just been caught. The police are interrogating you. You have been offered a deal by the police. For the purposes of this debate, this deal is reality (the police are not trying to trick you). The deal is simple: implicate your partner on all the crimes you two have performed together over the past five years and you walk. No conviction. Your partner will go to jail for 20 years. If you choose to take the fall with your partner (for the purposes of this debate we are assuming that your partner is not willing to implicate you), you both go to jail on the charge that you were caught, for about two years.

So, do you rat out your partner?

[Janus1]

whos to say they havent offered the same deal to your friend? do you trust him not to rat you out?

[Yanny]

This case assumes that your partner will not implicate you. It’s a hypothetical.

[Jermofoot]

I’m not experienced in debate.
Since you’ve pointed out that your partner won’t rat you out, then what’s the issue?  I’m curious as to how this would go…

[Yanny]

Well, I can think of seven independent points total, three in favor of ratting out your partner and four in favor of taking the fall with him.

I’m interested to see what arguements people think of, because I think my case in favor of ratting him out is a little weak.

[Jermofoot]

Can you supply your case?  I still am unclear as to how this debate proceeds, how you approach it, etc.
Then I might be able to help you.  Otherwise, being hypothetical, you rat the guy out and save your own hide.  Of course, there’s something I missing there, it can’t be that simple…

[Yanny]

Well, theres a formal procedure, which really isn’t important here. I just want to hear the arguements.

In short, my case for ratting your partner out:

• Jail sucks. Bad stuff happens in jail. You could end up in a cell with a 300 pound guy who wants to make you his wife

• This is a wake up call. By going to jail, you are more likely to get back into crime. You maintain your association with your partner, and you will be associated for a period of years with other criminals. You’ve already been caught, and this “get out of jail free” card may not exist in the future

• This is your chance to morally atone to society. Even if you morally don’t care about society, by doing this you begin to make amends. If you do not make amends, society will reject you (and you may revert back to a life of crime if society does). Try getting a job with a criminal record.

[Guest]

I think the point is less you, but your partner. How will he take it if you betray him?

A “robber” is someone who uses violence against people (a burglar on the other hand not necessarily uses violence).
Will your partner use violence against you to avenge your betrayal? … How much - if he is likely to kill you, then “winning a few years” is hardly worth it. Can you outsmart him - then even if he is likely to kill you can be worth it … by making it unlikely that he finds you.

etc.
Just a rough starting point.
In game theory words, your decision should be based on:
Is this game a “one time” game only, or will it be a repeated game ?

[Yanny]

Yep F_alk, that is definately the strongest arguement in favor of taking the fall with him.

In fact, I’ve expanded upon the revenge point. Even if your partner does not intend to seek revenge on you, you don’t know that. Do you really want to be watching your back for the rest of your life?

Luckily, no team has ever thought of that in opposition to this case. Take that Harvard!

I’m really looking for alternative arguements though. Things that I haven’t thought of.

Things that I have thought of:

1. Jail could provide some positive benefits as well as the negative aspects of incarceration. You and your partner will be around a lot of experienced thieves. You can pick up a trick or two that would make you a better bank robber. I’m not argueing that jail is prefered over no jail, but some positive things can come out of it.

2. Honor among thieves. If though you are a thief, you have probably developed some form of camraderie with your partner. It’s difficult to develope that strong bond in a normal occupation. You do not want to betray him or that bond.

[221B Baker Street]

I can argue yes, you rat out your partner.

The arguement for this is that the problem specifically states you are a robber, but it does not state that you are not a liar.  Unless the case specifies what you are capable of doing (i.e. lying, murder, etc.) I assume that you are a robber and only a robber.  Therefore you cooperate fully with the police out of a respect for authority and because of you believe it is wrong to lie (but not wrong to steal).

[Guest]

I think all the points you present (both pro and con) are plausible.  It just depends on how you argue it.  However, I would like to point out the factor of age.  Depending on the age you and your partner commit the crime, the health conditions in prison (a gamble, I know), and the possibility of parole, you may not see each other again until you’re much older.  And yes, while guns do make up much of the force differential, that can be offset by investment (20 years of earning money, investing in a secure house, getting your own gun, etc.).  There’s always the chance he could simply mellow out.

Consequently, the revenge point doesn’t stick as much, and the question is one of whether the 20 years of security followed by a possibility of revenge after your partner’s incarceration is offset by the personal security you have by taking the fall with him and the social stigma (and decreased earning power, financial/public security) after you both get out.  I think iteration is important, but probability of revenge is the holding factor here.

[Janus1]

you can make a strong argument for either side. missing on your list of ratting him out: in some ways, it is the “right” thing to do. you are helping the justice system work, and it works on this very kind of situation. people get immunity all the time for cooperating with police to allow them to get a conviction on someone else. i know your situation is a hypothetical, but could you modify it at all? because as it is, its unlikely that if the two of you are partners, and neither is the mastermind/a bigger criminal, that you would be offered a deal. is it a set situation? if not, i would say that for some reason, they want your partner more than you, or maybe they cant prove much on you, but they can on him. etc. maybe this doesnt impact the argument at all, i dont know how your debate works, but the other side could fault your situation, which would surely work against you.