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: Justin White (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Richard Chen (Cornell University)

Judge: Jevon Henry (The University of the West Indies)

Resolution: This house believes that prisons should be abolished

  • Justin White
    Justin White

    Richard Chen
    Richard Chen
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 28, 2015 01:34:42AM EST by Justin White




    Posted at April 28, 2015 08:58:21PM EST by Richard Chen



    America's prison population:

    Recidivism rate:

    Davis, A.Y. 2003. Are Prisons Obsolete?

    Prisoner's Justice Day Committee. A Model for Prison Abolition.

    Posted at April 29, 2015 11:53:36PM EST by Justin White



    Posted at April 30, 2015 10:28:45PM EST by Richard Chen



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 1, 2015 11:52:47PM EST by Justin White



    Same citations as previous 2 speeches.


    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 2, 2015 01:45:04PM EST by Jevon Henry

    Category Justin White Richard Chen
    Use of evidence: 3.8 3.5
    Delivery skill: 3.9 4.4
    Coherence of arguments: 3.3 3.7
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.6 4.3
    Identification of key points: 3.6 3.9
    Comments: This was a fairly decent round by Justin who started off very well. As the debate progressed, however, I believe his tone shifted a bit from his original framework on status/race. Your argument on saving cost which would go towards education was weak considering the comprehensive, and no doubt, costly alternative put forward. I would recommend, that while you speak very fast which is good to get a lot of content in, you should be careful that your clarity is not compromised. Richard had a great deal of consistency throughout by sticking to his main arguments. He was very responsive and really meticulous in challenging ideas put forward by the proposition. I did believe that your point on physical isolation was understandable. Your fluency is also commendable. I do believe that you could use more evidence to support your analysis.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Richard Chen

    Reason for Decision:

    The proposition's case seemed to have not flowed well from his initial ideas put forward on the matter of race and status. He did not make it clear as to how the alternative presented would solve this problem. His analysis of a corrupt government would still stand under the alternative proposed and so there was no clarity as to how this corruption would not still exist. The service to society analysis was better explained and the cost saving did not stand as his alternative was no doubt one which would be costly.

    The opposition's argument on physical isolation by removing persons from the communities stood and bore credit as I believe the proposition's misunderstanding of this and likening the 'isolation' to 'solitary confinement' was unreasonable. His idea of the state having an incentive to demonstrate control was fairly well developed and he sought to explain why this control is better in prisons rather than in a wider space. He also effectively pointed out that the cost saving idea in the proposition's case was unreasonable.

    In the end, the proposition's case needed more coherence and based on the content presented and refuted, the opposition had more substance left standing.

    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: