The Instigator
Jsud62
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Golfer15
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Prisons should be funded less money

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Golfer15
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/3/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 430 times Debate No: 64500
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Jsud62

Pro

One prisoner costs 37000 dollars a year to care for on average
Golfer15

Con

Hello, Im excited to debate this topic with you.

While I agree sometimes prison funding can be wasteful, because the prisoners in that prison usually have done horrible things.. But I hope to show that prisons should have the same amount of monetary funding. What if instead of taking funding away we pay prison guards more? On average their salary is between $37,000 to $45,000. Why are executives that aren't working as hard, and don't have half the danger that prison guards experience, getting paid more?

Also where do you get that figure? Researching I found that the average cost for a prisoner is $28,000.

So now I will explain what will happen if you were to take funding away from prisons.
The top three areas taking funding away from prisons would affect are:
-Security (Security cameras, Electronic locking doors and locks)
-Less food
-Less staff

1. Security
Taking away funding means taking away costs for extra security.

2. Less food
Taking away funding also meaning taking away food from prisoners to cut down on costs. What happens when a prison riot, or hunger strike happens? It's bound to happen when you take food away. Prison riots usually have lots of causalities leading to use of medical supplies, which costs money. If hunger strikes happen, the news will get wind of it and will cause a big uproar, causing governmental issues"..

3. Less staff
The last big thing taking funding away will affect is the staff. Staff will either get part of their salary taken away or some staff will be let go. When staff get part of their salary taken away, they will be very upset, leading to them not wanting to do their job right. Not many people want to go into a job that barely pays enough for you to survive while having the possibility of getting killed or injured. If staff were to get let go, there would be an overwhelming amount of prisoners for the small amount of staff to watch over. Usually prison guards are outnumbered to at least a 4:1 ratio of prisoners to a guard.

I would love to hear on how you would propose to cut funding without hurting the prison.
Good luck on this debate.
I am excited to hear your thoughts..
Debate Round No. 1
Jsud62

Pro

Jsud62 forfeited this round.
Golfer15

Con

Please state your next argument.
Debate Round No. 2
Jsud62

Pro

Jsud62 forfeited this round.
Golfer15

Con

I think from my first argument that i proved that prisons should not be funded less.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Marc2010 2 years ago
Marc2010
While I don't think prisons should be funded less per se, I believe that prisons should only be used to house and incarserate dangerous felons, not little Jimmy who happened to have been arrested smoking weed
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Jsud62Golfer15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture