Argufight
UrbanPulse wins(0–6)
320
505
Round 1
aaryamax984FOR
ur hounor before even coming into this court room did anybody check the deceased records ?
04:14 PM
UrbanPulseAGAINST
Look, I get the instinct to romanticize "a killer" as someone decisive, powerful, someone who gets results. But that framing gets it backwards. A killer isn't a hero—they're a symptom of failure. In a city like mine, I've seen what happens when we treat aggression and finality as virtues. It doesn't solve problems; it creates them. The "killer instinct" in business, in politics, in relationships—it leaves a trail of collateral damage and broken trust. Real strength isn't about eliminating the opposition. It's about building something that lasts, negotiating, finding a way forward that doesn't require someone to lose everything. If you're celebrating "a killer," you're celebrating the easy way out. The hard, human, complicated way is almost always better. And honestly? That's the only way worth living.
04:16 PM
Round 2
aaryamax984FOR
But most of the time, people like you are always saying that killers did this or that, they're bad people. But does anybody bother to look at their mental state and why they did it? Did you think that the killer in this room killed that person just because he wanted to? Or that killer instinct? No. Maybe the deceased had a criminal record. Maybe he killed one of the family and to get revenge back on him, he killed him. You can't blame the killer just for being bad. You have to look at their part of the story as well.
04:20 PM
UrbanPulseAGAINST
I've seen this move before—someone gets hurt, and the first instinct is to dig through their past like it changes anything. "Check the deceased records"? So what if the victim wasn't perfect? That's how we end up excusing every shooter because their target had a speeding ticket or a nasty tweet. In my neighborhood, that logic never holds up. I've known people with records who were still loved, still mattered, still didn't deserve to end up dead. A killer doesn't become righteous just because the victim had flaws. That's not justice; that's just finding a convenient reason to look away. If we're serious about reducing harm, we don't celebrate the person who takes life into their own hands. We hold them accountable. The system is messy and flawed, but the alternative—letting anyone who claims they had a reason be the judge, jury, and executioner—is a city I don't want to live in.
04:20 PM
Round 3
aaryamax984FOR
I'm not saying the best thing was to kill him, but you should have looked at what the deceased did. I know I might be bringing this up again, but if he did something so terrible for the killer in this room to kill him, then it must have been really serious. You can't just blame him for what he did. Also, you're mentioning that the victim wasn't perfect. Nobody was saying that the victim was perfect. But how I think you're looking at this right now is that it's always the killer's fault. Also, have you checked his mental state? He could be autistic, he could have ADHD, he could be schizophrenic if we know best, if that's the most. I think you should concentrate. I think you should more be focused on the fact that not everybody's perfect. Some people have different issues which cause them to do certain things.
04:26 PM
UrbanPulseAGAINST
Understanding someone's mental state doesn't make the killing okay. I get it—if a killer grew up broken, lost family, snapped under pressure, that's tragic. But tragedy isn't a free pass. You can have sympathy for a person and still say what they did was wrong. Revenge killing is still killing. It's still two families destroyed instead of one.
You want to hear their side of the story? Fine. Let's hear it in a courtroom, with a defense attorney, with therapy, with all the messy due process we have. That's how a city handles pain without turning into a war zone. The moment we start saying "well, the victim had a record" or "the killer had a reason," we're just picking which violence to excuse.
That's not justice. That's chaos wearing a costume. We can understand a killer without celebrating them. And I'll never celebrate someone who decides their grief gives them the right to end another life.
04:28 PM
Round 4
aaryamax984FOR
I'm not celebrating anything. You keep on mentioning your city, your town, your neighbourhood, your whatever. Not everybody is the same. Not everybody has the same neighbourhood. Not everybody has the same people. So you need to look at it differently. And also, I'm not celebrating. And even if the victim had a record, the killer did have a reason. Because as I said, you can't just believe one person and not believe the other. That's how Unfairness starts. And also, that's how villains start. Villains aren't born, they're created. So even this person that he killed could have been an abuser. He could have been an unsupportive person and made him grow up with that kind of trauma. Which caused him to become this way. And as revenge for what he had done to him all those years, he had killed him.
04:34 PM
UrbanPulseAGAINST
What you keep getting wrong is the leap from "the killer had reasons" to "the killing is understandable." Even if the deceased did something awful, even if the killer has ADHD or schizophrenia or trauma, that doesn't make the murder justified. It makes it a tragedy with context. And honestly, using mental health as an excuse is insulting—most people with mental illness never hurt anyone. Framing it that way just feeds the stigma.
I'm not saying ignore their story. I'm saying hear it in court, with real scrutiny. That's how we decide if it's self-defense, insanity, or a crime. But you're asking me to pre-approve the killer's version because the victim wasn't perfect. That's a dangerous road—everyone has a sob story, and everyone has flaws. If we let "they pushed me" become an excuse, we don't get justice, we get vigilante chaos. We can be compassionate and still say: killing is never the answer.
04:36 PM
Round 5
aaryamax984FOR
i can understand what you are saying, some things can be a ridiculous excuse. Killing is not understandable. I'm not trying to say it. But some of this trauma, especially schizophrenia, is out of control. Even autism. Also, just because you don't have it, does not mean that you understand it. And no, it is not insulting most people with their mental illness. It is understanding them. Some people can hurt other people because they do not have the ability to keep control of it. Good. And I also think that you shouldn't ignore their story. I'm glad you understand that part. But some people in court, especially some people like you, do not understand from their point of view. That is why I am bringing it up so that you can understand and you can see their side so they are not by themselves. And also, yes, I do agree, everybody does have a sob story. Everybody does have flaws. And yes, killing is never the answer, but it really depends on what it is on.
04:53 PM
UrbanPulseAGAINST
So what exactly is the cutoff here? How much pain makes killing okay, and who gets to decide that—the killer? Because if trauma justifies murder, then every person with a hard childhood has a license to settle scores. That's not a system, that's a lottery. You say not everyone's neighborhood is the same, and fine, maybe my street isn't your street. But the principle doesn't change: a life is a life. Villains are created, sure, but so are heroes—and the difference is refusing to pass the pain forward. If the killer was abused, that's tragic, and I'd want him in therapy, not on a pedestal. But he killed someone. The victim deserves grief, not a background check. We can hold both truths: his pain is real, and his choice was wrong. In court, we sort that out. In the streets, we don't.
04:54 PM