As only two people rally planned, and only 1 person of that posted, along with Mijv from the affirmative team, I'm hoping more will post, and plan this time.

We have a whole week so there is not reason to rush, but that doesn't mean we can just forget it. It'll be good to have a decent debate about this, and it's a really good topic to debate about.

My idea's that I have for this topic:
-Only for those who commit serious crimes, with more then life sentences.
-There is no doubt they they couldn't have committed it.
-They bludge off off taxpayers, after committing heinous crimes.
-They get free health care, free accommodation, tv, facilities.
-They contributed nothing to society, simply took, yet we reward them, it has to stop.

They are great ideas

i would also add,
- It would act as a deterant to commiting crimes
- It removes from society someone who would cause more harm
- It Removes from society someone who is incapable of rehabilitation

also we could either take the path of only used for murderers ,
ie so the family of the criminal can feel the same loss the victims family felt,
Or for repeat offenders of lesser crimes , so if you dont learn not to commit
crimes you face the consequences.

so basically
-to punish the criminal
-to take retribution on behalf of the victim

I would rather do the second post , but if you dont want to do the openning post ill do it

Good points, but I don't think that the retribution, and the loss to their family is a good idea to go on. It lowers us to their level, and does it not make us any better then them?

That is a point that they will use, "It makes us no better then they are".
So we will have to come up with a counter argument.
That's pretty much all they'll have to go on, so I think that: - They did it in cold blooded murder, They did not do it to achieve any sort of 'good' - simply for evil.

And I'll Make the first post, I'll try to only use a few points, so we have plenty left over.

well we will just have to see what they use as their main argument