Tohono Affirmative – ddi 2015 sws



Download 0.73 Mb.
Page11/23
Date conversion15.05.2018
Size0.73 Mb.
1   ...   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   ...   23

T – substantial

2%

1. We meet – we are 2% in the context of Tohono border patrol, Tohono policing, and probably border patrol



2. counterinterps

A. first c/I Substantial means socially or materially important


Christine Lindberg, 2007 (Managing Editor), OXFORD COLLEGEDICTIONARY, 2nd

Ed., 07, 1369. (NY: Sparks Publishing) Substantial: Important in material or social terms


All 1ac evidence indicates that the 1ac is both socially key (in terms of culture) and materially important (in terms of violence)

B. second c/I - Substantially is a relative term, depends on context


Words and Phrases 64 (Vol. 40, p. 816)

The word “substantially” is a relative term and should be interpreted in accordance with the context of claim in which it is used. Moss v. Patterson Ballagh Corp. D.C.Cal., 80 P.Supp. C10, 637.

This means either they give a definition in the context of surveillance or their interp is not only super limiting, but also super arbitrary

3. prefer our counterinterps – they allow for education about social issues in the context of policy as opposed to only strict policy education. This is as topical as we can get without occluding discussions of race or natives.

4. Their interp is bad – 2 reasons

A. Substantially cannot be determined by percentage tests – it obscure the complexity of policy options


Leo ‘8 (Kevin Leo** J.D. Candidate, Spring 2008, Hastings College of the Law. Hastings Business Law Journal Spring, 2008 4 Hastings Bus. L.J. 297 LEXIS) 

In contrast, the court in Haswell v. United States held that spending over sixteen percent of an organization's time on lobbying was substantial. n83 The court found that applying a strict percentage test to determine whether activities are substantial would be inappropriate, since  [*308]  such a test "obscures the complexity of balancing the organization's activities in relation to its objectives and circumstances in the context of the totality of the organization." n84


B. Their evidence is in the context of taxation of charitable contributions. This only lends credence to the argument that competing interps of substantially especially are totally arbitrary

5. Standards

Limits: Prefer breadth, we gain more topic education about large social issues in the status quo, like Islamophobia, natives, and also policy options that are materially important

Reasonability: Competing interps lead to a race to bottom, prefer reasonability.

Predictability: Ours is a core aff, it’s on the wiki, this is one you should be prepared for.

Ground: Generics solve any lost ground

Fairness: Potential abuse isn’t a voter, make them prove they have suffered in this round. There’s always a ridiculous aff that’s legit under an interpretation – you can’t force us to defend that

Education: Best for education, we learn about more issues while still keeping it adequately limited.



Short

1. We meet -



2.

A. c/I Substantial means socially or materially important


Christine Lindberg, 2007 (Managing Editor), OXFORD COLLEGEDICTIONARY, 2nd

Ed., 07, 1369. (NY: Sparks Publishing) Substantial: Important in material or social terms


All 1ac evidence indicates that the 1ac is both socially key (in terms of culture) and materially important (in terms of violence)

B. another c/I - do the neg’s interpretation and allow the aff in this instance – as long as we can prove that we’re reasonably topical, we garner all the advantages of the neg’s interp and allow one more aff that they can easily be prepared for

3. prefer our interp – allows for education about social issues in the context of policy as opposed to only strict policy education. This is as topical as we can get without occluding discussions of natives.

4. Standards

Limits: Prefer breadth, we gain more topic education about large social issues in the status quo, like Islamophobia, natives, and also policy options that are materially important

Reasonability: Competing interps lead to a race to bottom, prefer reasonability

Predictability: Ours is a core aff, it’s on the wiki, this is one you should be prepared for.

Ground: Generics solve any lost ground

Fairness: Potential abuse isn’t a voter, make them prove they have suffered in this round

Education: Best for education, we learn about more issues while still keeping it adequately limited.



AT: w/o material qualification

w/m – since nothing is without material qualification, we’ll assume they mean in the context of Tohono border surveillance. In that case, we’re w/o material qualification.

Comparative evidence indicts their definition


Justice Berdon, 8-24-99, Supreme Court of Connecticut, 250 Conn. 334; 736 A.2d 824; 1999 Conn. LEXIS 303

In addition, the plain meaning of "substantially" does not support the defendant's arguments. Black's Law Dictionary (6th Ed. 1990) defines "substantially" as "essentially; without material qualification; in the main . . . in a substantial manner." Likewise, "substantial" is defined as, "of real worth and importance; of considerable value; valuable. Belonging to substance; actually existing; real; not seeming or imaginary; not illusive; solid; true; veritable. . . . Synonymous with material." (Citations omitted.) Id. Thus, the requirement of a "substantial" association creates a threshold far below the exclusive or complete association argued by the defendant.


1   ...   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   ...   23


The database is protected by copyright ©dentisty.org 2016
send message

    Main page