Rehabilitation is more important than punishment

Thanks Hello-Orange. I accept that I have burden of proof as Pro and instigator, however I think it would help my opponent's case if he could make some constructive arguments of his own in favour of prioritising punishment, especially as I don't think any of his refutations stand up to much scrutiny. Con acknowledges the "incredibly valid point" of my opening but asks us to reject it's conclusion without really explaining why. Similarly, he doesn't really explain the following: "if we do not look to Punishment first then not only can justice never happen, but proper rehabilitation can never happen." I think my opponent needs to make the case for why justice and rehabilitation are dependent on prioritising punishment, rather than simply stating it as fact. Emotion (1) Con: "I completely reject the notion my opponent pushes that all of these various crimes will always result in the death penalty" I'm not really sure what Con is referring to here. I don't recall making any kind of reference to what type of crimes might merit the death penalty, and it's not a sentence I am in favour of at all. I am using it as an example because it represents the extreme of prioritising punishment over rehabilitation. Obviously, you can't rehabilitate a dead man. Con: "The first thing we need to reject in a debate such as this is any concept of emotion." Good. As I said, I find the emotional arguments the most (perhaps the only) persuasive arguments from my opponent's position. Con: "If criminals are not given the just compensation for their crimes then other innocent people are at risk to be victims of these criminals." This is a bit of a non sequitur. Obviously if a criminal is successfully rehabilitated then they are no longer a risk to the innocent either. My opponent seems to equate justice with punishment, but this is mere vengeance, not true justice. There are several dropped arguments here about the nature of justice and vengeance, the flawed premises of Old Testament style justice etc. Emotion (2) I'm British and my opponent is American, so throughout the debate, I've used a variety of sources, referencing both justice systems. The resolution does not refer only to the US, and I don't think it's reasonable of Con to dismiss evidence from the UK. In any case there is no doubt that miscarriages of justice are widespread in America too. [1] [2] Con: "this indication does not mean that we should completely reject punishment" Never said it did. Con: "It points that less energy needs to focused on rehabilitation and more on punishment so the victims of these crimes can receive justice fro the crimes committed against them." How on earth do miscarriages of justice mean we need to prioritise punishment more? Punishing the innocent is clearly wrong. This is basically more equivocation between justice and punishment and has nothing to do with the point in question. The cycles of crime argument is dismissed by my opponent on the basis of his anecdotal experiences. For anyone in doubt that prison generally has negative effects on families see here: [3] [4] Con claims that "while this was hard on me, it led me to develop a strong code of moral ethics. Thus this is a good thing." From this logic, one could argue: Sometimes raping children can lead them to develop a strong code of moral ethics, therefore raping children is good. I'm sure I don't have to point out the flaws in this argument. Deterrence "I cannot argue against my opponent's solid evidence." Sounds like a concession. "My opponent attempts to make this claim by looking at only the negative effects of this system and completely ignores the positive benefits" I would have thought that was Con's job to point them out. Obviously the death penalty does not apply to all crimes and I never made any suggestion it did. It is entirely relevant that we consider the effects that the ultimate deterrent has on crime, which turn out to be counter-intuitive, states with the death penalty having more murders as I showed last round. Mental Illness My opponent seems to be endlessly repeating his mantra that justice requires punishment and rehabilitation can't be considered until punishment has been enacted. He has presented zero logical explanation of this, and seems to be just using it to respond to every point. Con is correct in pointing out that "when one who is diagnosed properly with mental illness commits a crime this is taken into consideration", however what about the many mentally ill people who haven't got a proper diagnosis? With the cost of health care in America, and the stigma attached to mental illness, it should come as no surprise that plenty of ill people don't have a certificate to prove it. [5] [6] Criminalisation I'm sorry Con finds my argument abusive. I would have thought the logic and common sense of my points were self evident, but it's not difficult to find sources that back up the facts here, with police commissioners and prison chiefs acknowledging the extent of the issue. [7] [8] Con is right to point out that community sentences are still a form of punishment, however I think it is obvious that when compared to custodial sentences, community sentencing has less of an emphasis on punishment. Criminals on community programs do not have the same restrictions on their liberty (the main punitive aspect of prison) that confined criminals have. Arguments about recidivism have been dropped. Institutionalisation Con drops the argument because I didn't provide a quote from my source. He says: "I also am under a character restriction, and eve more so since I have to both refute my opponent's arguments (in which he used almost the entire 8,000 characters) as well as present my own." It is perhaps worth considering that a fair portion of my round 1 was sources and that Con has actually declined to make any constructive arguments of his own. In brief, these are the main impacts of institutionalisation as described by Heaney: Dependence on institutional structure and contingencies. Hypervigilance, interpersonal distrust, and suspicion. Emotional over-control, alienation, and psychological distancing. Social withdrawal and isolation. Incorporation of exploitative norms of prison culture. Diminished sense of self-worth and personal value. Post-traumatic stress reactions to the pains of imprisonment. [9] Economy See the point above about why community sentencing has less emphasis on punishment than prison sentencing. The rehabilitative aspects of community sentencing are far more pronounced than their custodial equivalent and can include drug treatment programs, education requirements, mental health treatment and many other rehabilitation measures not normally associated with prison. [10] [11] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://aspe.hhs.gov... [4] http://www.kevinmd.com... [5] http://www.selfhelparticles.net... [6] http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com... [7] http://thestandard.org.nz... [8] http://thescotsman.scotsman.com... [9] http://aspe.hhs.gov... [10] http://www.yjb.gov.uk... [11] http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...