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: Samuel Owens (Winston Churchill High School) vs. Opposition: Tania Rahman (Binghamton University)

Judge: Brian Manuel (Stanford University)

Resolution: This house believes that prisons should be abolished

  • Samuel Owens
    Samuel Owens
    vs.



    Tania Rahman
    Tania Rahman
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 14, 2015 12:02:43AM EST by Samuel Owens

    Citations

    Show

    Gilligan, James. "Punishment Fails. Rehabilitation Works." The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 Dec. 2012. Web. 13 Apr. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2Froomfordebate%2F2012%2F12%2F18%2Fprison-could-be-productive%2Fpunishment-fails-rehabilitation-works>.

    Posted at April 15, 2015 12:52:26AM EST by Tania Rahman

    Citations

    Show

    http://debate.uvm.edu/meanyparli.html

    Posted at April 16, 2015 12:15:10AM EST by Samuel Owens

    Citations

    Show

    Nasreen, Talisma. "Sweden Is Closing Its Prisons. What about a Prisonless World?" No Country for Women. N.p., 03 Dec. 2013. Web. 15 Apr. 2015. <http://freethoughtblogs.com/taslima/2013/12/04/sweden-is-closing-its-prisons-what-about-a-prisonless-world/>.

    Posted at April 17, 2015 02:45:44AM EST by Tania Rahman

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 18, 2015 01:06:43AM EST by Samuel Owens

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 19, 2015 12:05:06AM EST by Brian Manuel

    Category Samuel Owens Tania Rahman
    Use of evidence: 1.5 3.2
    Delivery skill: 1.8 3.4
    Coherence of arguments: 1 3.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 2.5 4
    Identification of key points: 1 4.1
    Comments: You need to slow down and focus on the central questions for the debate. Rather, you aim to go for small theory arguments rather than substantive claims in this debate. I think you should have focused on the Topicality question of "what is a prison" and spent less time on the question of "This house".

    The decision is for the Opposition: Tania Rahman

    Reason for Decision:

    This debate comes down to Topicality "What is a Prison." I believe the proposition is way behind in this debate. They define prisons as moves away from the status quo and advocate for anti-prisons. However, the proposition never deals adequately with the opps broader interpretation of "what is a prison," which includes the props alternative of anti-prisons since those participating in the anti-prisons would still be serving sentences for committing a crime. Therefore, the affirmative doesn't meet the burden of topicality since they functionally advocated for reformism rather than abolition.


    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:

    PHP MySQL SUIT