This is where all download will be listed, utilizing the Page Add plugin.
File Name | S22-Policy-Stoa-54-NEG-SpotlightTrafficking.docx |
File Size | 252.83 KB |
Date added | February 23, 2022 |
Category | Archived, Policy (Stoa) |
Author | Vance Trefethen |
Resolved: The United States federal government substantially reform the use of Artificial Intelligence technology
Case Summary: The AFF plan requires federal agents to use “Spotlight,” an AI tool that improves investigation of human trafficking. Spotlight is an app created by a group called “Thorn” and promoted by actor Ashton Kutcher with a lot of hype about its claims. That’s what most of it is – hype. They claim to be “rescuing” thousands of trafficking victims each year. That’s wrong for 2 reasons: 1) if you read the fine print in Thorn’s own literature, they really claim to be “identifying” (not rescuing) that many; and 2) The number of perpetrators and victims Thorn is claiming simply don’t exist in the crime statistics collected by the FBI nationwide. There just aren’t “thousands” of cases, perpetrators or victims in any given year in the criminal justice system. In 2019, most states reported zero arrests and convictions. If thousands are being caught, where are they? AFF will claim that the States are successfully using Thorn/Spotlight to catch thousands, but the data from the States shows just the opposite. They’re catching very few, and in most states, zero. NEG position is that the reason for this low number is: They don’t exist. Human trafficking, though tragic when it occurs, is way way overhyped and exaggerated. It’s a very rarely occurring crime. The reason some of the numbers appear high is that activists and/or law enforcement are adding into the numbers the cases of consensual prostitution and labeling them as “trafficking victims.” Strange, because they then go ahead and arrest the girls for prostitution, an odd thing to do if they were truly victims.
DISCLAIMER #1: The topic of this brief is somewhat sensitive and difficult to discuss. This NEG brief is written in response to an Affirmative case that is being run in this debate league written by someone else. We didn’t originate this topic. We’re trying to help teams debate against this case by publishing this brief. If you find the topic offensive, you are welcome to throw this brief away, but understand you may then have to debate this topic anyway going Negative, but without any evidence.
DISCLAIMER #2: This brief makes a distinction between consensual activity (e.g. prostitution) and coerced activity (victims of trafficking). This doesn’t imply we’re endorsing improper consensual activity. We’re merely distinguishing it from the harms in the Affirmative case. Consensual activity is a sin, but not necessarily a crime (or not necessarily should be treated as one, given all the “real” violent crimes going on that should get law enforcement’s priority). Time, money and police resources spent chasing after people engaged in consensual sin is bad for society because all of those resources could have been used to fight “real” crime that actually harms others.