BIRT statutory release be abolised

Hey i was just wondering how i should debate this for school. Im going to provincials and i dont even no how to start!!! So if anyone want to talk about it i would be happy to listen and rebutt. Because this is really really really important.

It would wholly depend on what BIRT statutory release is. You do not give the audience or the opponent any information that is crucial to your argument. A good debater provides enough of their own information (preferably with sources) so that someone with absolutely no prior knowledge of the topic would have a thorough understanding of it. Without providing any evidence your argument appears to be extremely weak. That would greatly help your chances in both your competition and the current debate at hand.
Please provide information on this subject as Google is not being very helpful.

Okay then
I'll make it formal, good afternoon ladies, gentlemen, honorable judges and worthy opponents, thank-you for taking the time to participate in this debate. The resolution we are arguing is BIRT statutory release be abolished in Canada. And as the Negative team apparently we strongly believe that this resolution must and will fall. To support my argument i would like to rebutt some of the key points made by the opposition...
(you can base a whole negative speech on rebuttal, in fact what i do is i write a speech and weave in points of rebuttal) Now we the negative (scince the affirmative has neglected to define the resolution) define our resolution as the following:
statutory realease: the law in which prisioners of federal prison are released after 2/3s of their jail time.
abolished: no longer in use.
There fore we the negative (me the negative) believe that we should abolish this law.
I would put points in eventually have a speech with a woven rubuttal as stated however i havent searched the topic yet and was hoping someone else new about it!

It also helps to have your sides straight. Think of pro as saying "I am for" and con as "I am against", and then putting the topic afterward. This means that you are saying you are against BIRT statutory release being abolished. I am the side that does want it abolished. You want it kept because of the side you are on. If it is a matter of pro and con you have chosen the wrong position.
In the future, if you truly want to get experience from this site and being able to apply it to a real debate, you should simply make an actual argument. That way you will be able to see what an actual opponent will say in rebuttal to your statements and prepare yourself. Make an actual debate and actually debate it. As they say, practice makes perfect.

On BIRT statutory release:
It should be abolished. A criminal should be obligated by law to serve the full term of his imprisonment in accordance to his crime. Without the fear of rotting in jail criminals will run rampant. Knowing that they have to ability to get out early gives criminals that much less to fear. Rather than having the threat of wasting 20 years of their life for rape, they will know that they could easily get off in 12. That is 8 more years of undeserved freedom. 8 more years the criminal would have had to spend staring at a concrete wall they will now be able to spend in the outside. To them, 12 is infinitely better than 20, making it almost like a slap on the wrist. Criminals need to know that they will never get off easy for breaking the law. They need to fear the loss of their life to small concrete room. Otherwise, we might as well just give them 'get out of jail free' cards. Darth_Grievous_42 out.