Over 4,000 lynchings were documented in the U.S. between 1882 and 1968, and that’s just the ones we know about. Every single one was a brutal, public execution meant to terrorize an entire community. So my opponent isn’t proposing something new—he’s dragging back a horror that left thousands of families shattered and still haunts this country today. Now, let’s think about this clearly. Utilitarian? The suffering you’d cause—the victims, their loved ones, the wider social fabric—overwhelms any twisted sense of satisfaction. Deontological? Every person has inherent dignity and the right to life, full stop. And virtue ethics? What kind of person even considers this? Not a just one. There’s no good argument for lynching. There’s no data that supports it as a solution to anything. It’s pure hatred dressed up as policy, and it fails every moral test I can throw at it. So no, not in 2026, not ever.

[No submission - Time expired]

Picture a kid in 2026 watching his dad get strung up on a tree just because the mob didn't like his skin. That kid doesn't care about your racism or your beliefs—he just lost his father. And that's the thing: your whole argument, if you can call it that, is just "I hate Black people." That's not a reason, it's a feeling. From a utilitarian view, the terror and pain this unleashes on millions outweighs any pleasure you get. From a basic decency view, every person has a right to live. Hatred isn't a policy. It's just cruelty.