This past Tuesday, April 22, I participated in a debate on Stand-Your-Ground hosted by UC Berkeley Law School.
As you might expect, hilarity ensued.
It turned out there were actually three sides to the debate. The two lawyers on the anti-SYG side of the issue were opposed to the debate proposition that "Florida state law may be flawed, but Stand Your Ground is a fundamentally sound policy that protects the innocent."
I, of course, was on the pro-SYG side.
My debate partner, a lovely woman and law professor, Andrea Roth, was nominally on my side, but in fact did not take a pro-SYG position. Her position would more accurately be described as "undecided on SYG."
The way the debate was structured was we each had a 6 minute slot for opening statements. I spoke first (awesome). You can see my opening statements here (the full-length video of debate is at bottom of post):
The way the debate winner was determined was by greatest change in audience opinion. The audience voted prior to the start of the debate, and again at the conclusion. The starting vote had me at 18, the anti-SYG side at 53, and the rest undecided.