Topic: The use of public defenders should be mandatory

Argument: public defenders are a waste of government money and should not be allowed

Argument: public defenders are a way to protect those that are unjustly accused of crimes

Argument: public defenders are already incredibly overworked. adding to their caseload by mandating everyone use them will just mean that everyone gets significantly worse representation.

Argument: public defenders are an important part of the judicial system are necessary for those who cannot afford their own attorney.

Argument: public defenders are helpful for poor people who cannot afford a lawyer

Argument: public defenders are more effective at getting plea deals, this is good because now you will have less people going to jail if everyone is using public defenders.

Argument: public defenders are much more likely to be corrupted than private lawyers, by preventing people from having an alternative the government opens up public defender corruption to harm more people.

Argument: public defenders are often less experienced and less competent. if someone is accused of a crime it is their right to decide representation. their life depends on it.

Argument: public defenders are often overworked and should only support those who cannot afford another attorney.

Argument: public defenders are required to defend their clients as best as they can.

Argument: public defenders are so overburdened that defendants often sit in jail for months before the public defender is able to handle their case.

Argument: public defenders are usually overworked and giving everyone one will cause the quality to drop

Argument: public defenders are waste of money and should be rigged off as pointless in every means.

Argument: public defenders can assist the poor and lower middle classes when they cant afford legal representation

Argument: public defenders could easily be swayed by corrupt governmental forces, one way or another.

Argument: public defenders do not have an agenda besides the task at hand and are more efficient than a lawyer who is trying to rack up the fees.

Argument: public defenders level the playing field in court

Argument: public defenders should automatically defend the criminal, since obviously they can not afford a private lawyer.,

Argument: public defenders should be mandatory because it puts everybody on the same playing level

Argument: public defenders should be provided to all charged persons to ensure they receive representation and a fair trial.  all persons deserve qualified representation regardless of their ability to pay.

Argument: public defenders should not be mandatory for people who already plead guilty to crimes they've committed

Argument: public defendors must be used so that a defendant can have a fair trial.