Justice delayed is justice denied

Obviously in a democracy, it takes a lot of time for a statement to be passeded, in such a situation, the case goes out of the mainstream and people forget the culprit and the depth of situation. so how can how think of justice in such a case?

I'll make 2 quick arguments for now:

1. Justice Delayed

The very phrase/concept of 'justice delayed' suggests that justice is/was served; it simply is/was postponed or deferred until a later point in time. However, regardless of WHEN justice is/was served, it is/was still being served... meaning that justice is/was not denied, and I have negated the resolution -- (Sorry for all of the is/was's).

2. Temper Temper

Our first reaction to a provoking situation is passionate. For instance, if my friend said something a little mean about me, I might be FURIOUS about it at first. I may even choose to punch my friend in the face. However in time, chances are that I'll have calmed down and rationality will have had a chance to resignate. We are, after all, instincutal beings (though we do have the ability to process logic and reason and use discretion). Sometimes that discretion - or better judgment - takes a little time. Usually after the initial shock, heartbreak or anger of an emotional situation, we are able to come to terms with reality regarding the situation, and our opinion of what is at hand has changed.

An example in modern society of this shift deals with the support if the war in Iraq. At first, public opinion for the war was high as the Bush administration threw words like 'weapons of mass destruction' and 'remember 9/11' around. Everyone wanted Osama dead, the Taliban destroyed and - ha - peace in the middle east. Yet here we are 5 years later and public opinion has certainly changed, to say the least! In March of 2003, 72% of Americans supported the war, whereas in February of 2008, only 38% still believed in the cause [1].

My point? This example is just one of many which illustrate how people may realize they "may have been wrong..." with their initial thought process or approach. Instead, I argue that justice delayed can actually LEAD TO justice being served, in the sense that time actually allows for clarity and the opportunity to take many things into account regarding what is moral/fair/just.

3. Rebuttal

I also don't necessarily agree with my opponent's claim that time makes people forget. For instance, I don't think people would welcome Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot with open arms given their crimes, or even bother trying to minimize their failures/terror. You often hear the phrase "Time heals all wounds," not "Time eliminates justice."

I guess you have no choice but to extend my arguments, as all of them have gone unopposed... So yeah. 100 characters.

Justice delayed is justice delayed... not justice denied. Vote Con. And Pro, maybe I'll cya around for another debate sometime. Take care.