3 thesis statement (motion: against)

1/ lấy lại sự công bằng cho gia đình nạn nhân

2/ ngăn chặn, răn đe tội phạm
3/ chi phí chi trả cho tù nhân cao !!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opening Speech: Capital punishment should be banned
Motion: AGAINST

I. INTRODUCTION:
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. We are Thanh Tuyen, Huong Giang and Thanh Thuy,
standing here before all of you, strongly oppose to a motion that: “Capital punishment should
be banned”. While many people think this act is inhumane and cruel, they do not really
understand why these criminals were sentenced (bị kết án) to death. We believe that the death
penalty is the most worthy punishment (hình phạt xứng đáng) for those who have committed
the heaviest crimes. In this speech, we will prove you three main points to support our stance
(Lập trường của chúng tôi).
1/ First, capital punishment will bring justice to the victim's family and eliminate the risk of
future threats. Have you heard about the massacre (vụ thảm sát) of a family with 6 people in
Binh Duong in 2015? Murderer/Killer Nguyen Hai Duong killed his ex-girlfriend’s family
because of love conflicts. So do you think this killer deserves to be punished? Every mistake
must be punished. And the most worthy punishment is death penalty. In case that the killer
escapes from prison and takes revenge, then the safety of the victim's family will be
threatened.
2/ Second, capital punishment remains the strongest measure to prevent violent crime and
better protect society. In fact, there have been a number of studies that have provides
statistical data (dữ liệu thống kê) supporting the outstanding prevent effect of the death
penaty for murder. For example, in England, according to data from the Ministry of Home
Affairs of the country, the murder rate has double since the death penalty was abolished (in
1964), specifically from 300 cases in 1964 to 833 case in 2004.
3/ Finally, imprisoning criminals for a long time will cost a lot of money. Example: Each
year, the cost for an inmate is about $22,000. That means a person sentenced to five years in
prison would cost the public more than $100,000. The number of years of detention will be
directly proportional to the amount paid for detention. Instead, the death penalty would be the
best way to reduce costs.
In conclusion, we strongly disagree with the view that capital punishment should be banned. I
urge you to join me in supporting this necessary and just practice. Capital punishment
provides closure for victims' families, serves as a deterrent (răn đe) to potential criminals,
and ensures that justice is served for the most heinous crimes committed against our society.
Let us stand together in support of this important issue. Thank you.
 II. CROSS-EXAMINATION:

Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 3

Society (ko cải thiện tệ Proven innocent (tử Affect deter to crime
Opposite sign nạn XH) hình nhầm ng vô tội)

Không đúng vì nếu ko tử Agree but however tỉ lệ Q: you said that CP

Question hình -> tỉ lệ ra tù sẽ tái người vô tội ko nhiều cannot reduce crime
phạm tội CAO -> revenge bằng người phạm tội -> rate -> Bằng chứng?
-> vậy bạn có chắc rằng số liệu cụ thể??? How Give specific ex / cases.
các phạm nhân sau khi many percent?
ra tù sẽ hoàn lương?

Ex: Tks for your speech, we have listen to all of your arguments. Now I have a question for
you. -> lặp lại luận điểm của bên kia (Ms.A said that...) -> đưa ra lập luận (However, there
are many cases ...) -> đặt câu hỏi (Where/Why/What, Are you sure,...???)

III. REBUTTAL
1. Answer the question
Ex: Tks for your speech, we have listen to all of your questions. Now I would like to answer
question 1. -> lặp lại câu hỏi của bên kia (Ms.A said that...) -> đưa ra luận điểm của bản thân.
2. Rebuttal speech
1. Lặp lại lập luận của đối phương
2. Đưa ra ý kiến của bản thân về lập luận đó
3. Cung cấp bằng chứng cho lập luận của bản thân
4. Kết luận về lập luận của đối phương

Ex: Tks for your speech, we have listen to all of your statement. Now I would
like to ...
1. Ms A said that: “Death doesn’t prevent crime. So, CP is
ineffective.”
2. I agree with your statement, tuy CP kh ngăn chặn hoàn toàn tội
phạm nhưng nó sẽ góp phần trong việc răng đe và ổn định rật
tự xã hội.
3. ...
4. Hơn hết việc loại bỏ một người ra khỏi đời sống xh bởi án tử là
điều cần thiết khi xét thấy người đó không còn khả năng cải
 tạo, giáo dục được nữa, dễ tái phạm, hành vi gây hoang mang,
phẫn nộ cho xã hội.
Và quan trọng là tính răng đe, giáo dục, nếu bỏ án tử thì mn sẽ
nghĩ đi tù chung thân còn có ngày ra, vậy thì khả năng nhìu
người sẽ lợi dụng điều đó mà phạm tội rất nhìu. -> So, my
statement is ... than yours.

IV. Closing Statement

In conclusion, we have heard many convincing arguments today on both sides of this issue.
However, after careful review of the evidence, I believe my position is stronger. Let me recap
my 3 main points on why I strongly oppose "CPs should be banned". First, get justice for the
victim's family. By giving the killer a chance to live, rehabilitation makes the life of the
victim's family unsafe. Second, it is necessary to deter criminals with the death penalty to
minimize the number of crimes. And last but not least, the death penalty will be the most
optimal measure to optimally reduce the cost of life imprisonment. Finally, this issue is
important because it affects people's lives. Therefore, I urge you to support my position and
help us move towards a society free of evils.