[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
A few critique ideas and a note on enhancements
I have been reading and enjoying the thread on critiques. Like them
or not, they appear to be emerging as a viable argument strategy and
the "I won't vote on what I don't understand" position will hopefully fade as
judges become informed. While I might expect a number of teams to
pull out critiques of the legal system (feminism, CLS), I'd like to
toss out a few ideas:
(1) The resolution seems to address issues relevant to the penal
system (punishment) as opposed to the legal system (process). This
might be an interesting starting point for some critiques.
(2) There are at least two terms in the resolution that, in my
opinion, might be critique-able. One is "punishment." Thinking in a
mindset based on punishment, as opposed to rehabilitation, may be
responsible for many of the problems we suffer in terms of crime,
prison overcrowding, etc. Why not critique the penal system?
A second term is "violent crime." There has to be some basis for a
resolutional critique of this term. It creates a highly inflammatory
framework in which intelligent people can't think straight. Trust me,
I work with DAs...
One final note: If any teams are running enhancements for subsequent
offenses, do a little solvency research. The Deputy DA in my area
thinks they are the biggest "time suck" imaginable. New Mexico now
makes a 4th or subsequent DWI a felony. Because of the difficulty in
proving valid prior convictions, we have yet to have a felony DWI
sentenced as a felony. However, because the proof of priors does not
take place until sentencing, there is a massive waste of time in
prosecuting the offense. To some extent, the same is true of habitual
offender enhancements (affectionately called "the Bitch" in N.M.).
Enjoy the topic...
Tom Murphy
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page