Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Jacqueline Haugen (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Lainey Anderson (Wood River High School)

Judge: Dan Schatz (Unaffiliated)

Resolution: This house believes that prisons should be abolished

  • Jacqueline Haugen
    Jacqueline Haugen

    Lainey Anderson
    Lainey Anderson
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 14, 2015 11:29:06AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz



    Greenstreet, Stuart. "Prison Doesnt Work." Prison Doesnt Work. Philosophy Now, 1 May 2015. Web. 14 Apr. 2015.

    "The Price of Punishment:Prisons in Massachusetts." Price of Punishment Table of Contents. Urban Planning Aid Inc., 1 Jan. 1974. Web. 14 Apr. 2015. <>.

    "Alternatives To Incarceration In A Nutshell." FAMM. Families Against Mandatory Minimums, 1 Jan. 2005. Web. 14 Apr. 2015. <>.

    "INSTEAD OF PRISONS: A HANDBOOK FOR ABOLITIONISTS." Instead of Prisons Table of Contents. Ed. Mark Morris. Fay Knopp, Coordinator PREAP & Jon Regier, Executive Director New York State Council of Churches, 1 Jan. 1976. Web. 14 Apr. 2015. <>.

    Posted at April 14, 2015 11:32:56PM EST by Lainey Anderson



    "Prison Abolition & Alternatives." Prison Abolition & Alternatives. PrisonJustice.CA, 2008. Web. 13 Apr. 2015. <>.

    TIME. "Inside the World's Most Humane Prison - Photo Essays." Time. Time Inc., 2015. Web. 14 Apr. 2015. <,29307,1989083_2137374,00.html>.

    Posted at April 15, 2015 10:01:48PM EST by Jacqueline Haugen



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 17, 2015 01:41:13AM EST by Lainey Anderson



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 18, 2015 12:29:19AM EST by Jacqueline Haugen



    None available for this speech.


    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 19, 2015 12:03:53PM EST by Dan Schatz

    Category Jacqueline Haugen Lainey Anderson
    Use of evidence: 5.5 4.5
    Delivery skill: 5.5 5
    Coherence of arguments: 5.8 5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 5.5 4.6
    Identification of key points: 5.5 4.4
    Comments: You did a great job responding to the oppositions arguments. Specifically not allowing her to determine the rules of the debate and accepting her definitions which could have been damning. I think you did a good job applying previous arguments (such as economics) to not only contend her points but extend your own argument. In the future if you want to add an additional argument such as abuse by time you need to impact it which you started to do by saying how it is unfair given you have the shortest talk after. How does this hurt your education? Extend this further if you are actually going to go for it. Although in this debate just mentioning it help spread your opponent a little more. I think you did a great job bringing in a viable alternative and painted a picture of what reform would look like better than I have seen in other debates. I did buy the fact that this reform would be incredibly expensive and in the end I don't have a reason why this is better than the proposition especially when you conceited her definition of prison, i.e. she still has psychiatric asylums to help treat the most severe offenders. Maybe you could have brought in information about how psychiatric asylums do not work or are already at whits ends, or unable to address such severe underlying illnesses.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Jacqueline Haugen

    Reason for Decision:

    This was the best debate I have heard so far. In the end both sides say change needs to happen. I think the key point was that psychiatric asylums will still exist for the most serious offenders and that can work. Further the economic costs of prisons is huge and the reform would be quite expensive as well. The harm of dangers to civilians was not fleshed out completely and so the harms associated with prison abolishment were minimal within this debate

    1 Comment

    Thank you so much for judging! - Lainey Anderson on April 21, 2015 at 11:38AM EST

    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by: