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: Chris Mok (Unaffiliated) vs. Opposition: Kim-Ha Nguyen (PHT)

Judge: Arturo Feliz (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Chris Mok
    Chris Mok
    vs.



    Kim-Ha Nguyen
    Kim-Ha Nguyen
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at June 1, 2020 10:53:03PM EST by Chris Mok

    Citations

    Show

    https://www.mic.com/articles/109138/sweden-has-done-for-its-prisoners-what-the-u-s-won-t

    Posted at June 2, 2020 08:38:12AM EST by Kim-Ha Nguyen

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at June 4, 2020 02:18:46AM EST by Chris Mok

    Citations

    Show

    https://time.com/4596081/incarceration-report/
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-prisons-make-us-safer/
    https://www.vox.com/2015/2/13/8032231/crime-drop

    Posted at June 4, 2020 10:28:35PM EST by Kim-Ha Nguyen

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at June 6, 2020 12:22:27AM EST by Chris Mok

    Citations

    Show

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10730060/Lack-of-freedom-is-the-true-punishment-in-jail.html

    https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-california-jails-inmates-20190523-story.html

    https://eji.org/issues/prison-conditions/

    https://www.innocenceproject.org/how-many-innocent-people-are-in-prison/

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at June 6, 2020 10:22:11AM EST by Arturo Feliz

    Category Chris Mok Kim-Ha Nguyen
    Use of evidence: 3 3
    Delivery skill: 1.4 1.2
    Coherence of arguments: 3 3
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3 3
    Identification of key points: 3.6 2.6
    Comments: Chris You should watch your time. At 4:00 I stop flowing in your constructive. I see no reason for you taking a full extra minute.

    In rebuttal I stop flowing at 3:00. You can't just take the time that you feel you need. The format has times to assure everyone gets a balanced chance.

    Same thing on closing speech. I think you don't need to be offensive in your speech to make your point. I would prefer that you keep decorum, unless you can't make a point as to why your tone is appropriate or called for.

    More comments in RFD



    Kim-Ha You need to watch your time. At 5:00 I stop flowing.(You're taking 6 instead of 5) You need to adapt to the time given by the format. The fact that Chris took an additional minute does not validate you taking an additional minute as well.

    You take and additional minute on your rebuttal. I stopped flowing at 4:00 (you took 5 instead of 4)

    More comments in RFD

    The decision is for the Proposition: Chris Mok

    Reason for Decision:

    RFD First of all. To both debaters. You need to respect the times in the clocks. You can't take an additional minute. Times assure somewhat balanced and fair opportunity for both sides. I will stop flowing your case after you go over.

    I will reflect this on both sides performance points.

    I think the debate round comes down to the following points:

    1.-The need for "A" system. You both agree, so it's a wash.

    2.-A reform. You both agree to some type of reform. Opposition seems to join the idea a bit later. Proposition has a more detailed earlier presented plan. I go proposition here.

    3.-State's responsibility v. burden. I believe the prop makes a better case at proving that the state is morally responsible.

    4.-Punishment v. rehabilitation. I go proposition here.

    5.-Undeserved punishment. I have to go proposition here. I can't agree that you deserve conditions similar to torture for a misdemeanor.

    6.-Opposition had an argument that I found interesting but did not hear much of: limited resources, and the cost of implementing a new system. This was probably your best argument but I feel you fell a bit for the proposition's case.

    I feel the frameworks were not necessarily contradictory or made a difference.


    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