Resolved: In the United States, minor jail time ought to be replaced with significant rehabilitation

After reading your first post, I can tell that this will indeed be a great debate that I am looking forward to see unfold. Good luck… with that, I will begin my rebuttal against my opponent's case… I. The Value of Justice 1. The definition of Justice Since my opponent never defined justice, I will take the liberty of doing so. Justice is defined from dictionary. com (American Heritage Dictionary) as… "The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law" 2. The Value of Societal Welfare upholds Justice It is simple to see that if the society has a high sense of "welfare" and the general good is high, you will see the most possible people getting their "due reward. " What you will also see within this resolution is that whoever proves that they are keeping the greatest amount of welfare/justice for the society will win this round. The major difference is the safety provided. In other words, which form of "punishment" or "justice" will provide the most safety and therefore provide the most societal welfare. 3. The Value of Justice is most gained on the Pro side with significant rehabilitation. (from . http://www.criminon.org...) Basically, what I advocate on the Pro side is systems of rehab specified for the common criminal. Simply by voting pro… you open the door for having the possibility of saving criminal acts by happening, not by putting them in jail for a day or two and hoping they get better, but by going through logical programs made SPECIFICALLY for the common criminal. I urge you to read the Criminon program but if time is an issue I will sum it up for you… The program "Criminon" actually is an international program meant to increase the common criminal's "self-respect" by targeting specific issues such as drugs, family issues, and even common sense practices. Therefore, making significant rehabilitation as the greatest CHANCE for what the society's true goal ought to be… no crimes. Therefore giving the most "due reward" to the most society members thus having the most Justice on Pro. II. The Criterion of Appropriate Punishment 1. The accepted Criterion for this round is gained on the Pro side Since we both have the same criterion, you have to see that whoever gains this Criterion and ACTUALLY has appropriate punishment that gains the welfare for the general society and gives due award to the most people wins this round. If you Cross apply the program of Criminon to coincide with this argument, you will see the capabilities of significant rehabilitation. Let's quickly take a look to what jail time does. Basically, what you have to ask yourself is "what does prison do? " The answer is quite obvious; it forces people to be locked up in a room with or without their consent to receive their "due" of committing a crime. Now re-look at that statement, what you will see is that "significant rehabilitation" will give the same due except it will keep the interest of the society in mind when trying to actually fix the problem instead of punishing the problem, which makes the appropriate punishment in this round significant rehabilitation. 2. Jail time is ineffective in fixing the problem. Throughout this round, you will find yourself looking at two options and trying to pick the better of the two. I have shown you the attempts that significant rehabilitation offers, but now let's look to the effectiveness of jail time itself. ----From (. http://www.angus-reid.com...) Although this article only specifies young people, it still does give good general information on the effectiveness of jail time on youth. The study asks, "Do you think sending young people to prison for non-violent crimes is effective or not effective in reducing the likelihood of them re-offending? "… The percentages were then given that only 21% had any effectiveness, 66% having no effectiveness, and 14% we don't know if it was effective. What this study shows us is that jail time (especially for youth) are not having any affect of changing them for the better. This is a major problem because we are not making the attempt of changing them but merely of punishing them. Rehabilitation must be made the appropriate punishment. III. Rehabilitation is not a Just form of Punishment. --> Simply what I have to say against this is what is just? How does it tie in to justice? Is rehabilitation more or less "just" than jail time? If so… how? If it is not just, does that mean it we shouldn't replace the jail time with the rehabilitation? In other words, I basically need a little more of this argument and how it supports anything on the con side. IV. Jail time is a just form of punishment. --> Again, I don't know how this ties into this round, a little clarification would be nice with maybe a definition of just perhaps. But for argumentative purposes I would just like to point out a version of what is just and that is intentions. Look to what each form of punishment intends to accomplish and then you will find what is truly just. Jail time (which is undoubtedly just meant to punish) and significant rehabilitation (which is meant to have a form of punishment against the criminal and gives the chance and intention to save the criminal). I personally see the significant rehab as what is more just. Simply with all of these arguments, I have proven that minor jail time truly should be exchanged for significant rehabilitation. Since it gives the greatest amount of societal welfare by giving the most people justice by applying the true appropriate punishment, you must see that: In the United States, minor jail time ought to be replaced with significant rehabilitation… so please vote pro! Thank You