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: Dylan Fleming (Unaffiliated) vs. Opposition: Luke Moon (Jefferson Forest High School)

Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Resolved: The United Nation should require countries to uniformly enact substantial criminal justice reform in one or more of the following: forensic science, policing, sentencing.

  • Dylan Fleming
    Dylan Fleming
    vs.



    Luke Moon
    Luke Moon
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at July 6, 2020 10:36:40PM EST by Dylan Fleming

    Citations

    Show

    https://www.naacp.org/criminal-justice-fact-sheet/

    Posted at July 8, 2020 01:23:11AM EST by Luke Moon

    Citations

    Show

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/interpol-the-global-police-force-that-isnt/362086/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2000/11/26/a-look-at-war-crimes-and-punishment/d96dadc6-bcb2-4dac-81fd-5d04ef6bd899/

    https://globalsolutions.org/why-the-un-is-in-danger-of-becoming-irrelevant/

    https://www.interpol.int/en/Who-we-are/What-is-INTERPOL

    https://www.cfr.org/article/funding-united-nations-what-impact-do-us-contributions-have-un-agencies-and-programs

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/10/un-failing-league-of-nations-isis-boko-haram

    https://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_crimes

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23999066

    Posted at July 9, 2020 12:01:02AM EST by Dylan Fleming

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 10, 2020 12:52:48AM EST by Luke Moon

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 10, 2020 11:28:13PM EST by Dylan Fleming

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at July 17, 2020 11:27:59PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Category Dylan Fleming Luke Moon
    Use of evidence: 3.5 5.2
    Delivery skill: 3.8 5
    Coherence of arguments: 4.3 5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.6 5.2
    Identification of key points: 3.7 5.1
    Comments: Good job stating what you're defending right at the start. I would suggest specifying how those reforms should be implemented / what they should look like instead of just stating the areas that you think should be reformed. I also wish you relied on a little more sources and verbally cites some during your speech. Also try to conjure a bit more energy in your voice when you speak. You could also impact out your argument a bit more as well.

    Nice work responding to your opponent's arguments. Try to do a better job framing your arguments and highlighting the most important impacts in the debate. Use more evidence to back up your claims as well. I like your answers to INTERPOL (although I wished you had evidence to prove your arguments against them as an agent and in favor of the UN as an agent).

    Make sure you start off with why you win the debate in your closing speech. Frame the round, don't just get caught up in some of the details.
    Great job introducing yourself, having evidence, and clearly road mapping at your argument. I like your rate of delivery and your clarity. Nice work starting off with your offense and then going on to answer your opponent's arguments. The counterplan withe INTERPOL was a good idea. Your security council veto argument might be solved by fiat.

    I would make sure you use all your speech time. Having only 2 speeches to the prop's 3 means you really need to make use of your time. I'd also suggest extending specific pieces of evidence and make the argument that I should prefer your arguments because of evidence. Nice work pointing out the 2nd contention getting dropped.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Luke Moon

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote for the opposition because he wins that the UN won't be able to effectively enforce the prop's policy and only risks increasing inequality because it won't uniformly applied by the UN. This creates a credibility question for the UN when it cherry picks which rights violations they take up. This means that even if INTERPOL might not be perfect, it is better than the UN since the prop drops the majority of these indicts in their rebuttal speech.


    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