Plans in LD No Limits Debate Camp

What a Plan Is Resolutions like Resolved: The United States ought to submit to the jurisdiction of an international court designed to prosecute crimes against humanity. Contain a question of value and a question of policy. “Ought to submit” = issue of morality – what is right and wrong, what we should do. “International court….to prosecute crimes against humanity…” – this is a “plan”. To affirm you must win both parts – we ought to and it should be a international court. To negate, you can defeat either of these propositions.

Elements of a Plan Plans must : Must solve the problem (solvency) Be a warranted response to a warranted problem in the status quo. (need) Must solve the problem (solvency) Must not create more or worse problems than the problems in the SQ it solves. (harms or disadvantages) Necessity of weighing Negative strategy: accept the affirmative case when it demonstrates the problem in the SQ, Offer an alternative plan and win it.

Some things to pay attention to in arguing a plan Use CX to nail down exactly what the negative plan is. (plan text) Be sure the plan is uniquely different from the affirmative/contentional “plan” Be sure to compare your plan to theirs (harms or disadvantages) Offense is in showing your plan is superior It is not enough to show their plan is bad. Remember the ways of weighing Time Magnitude probability

Lets group write a plan for our resolution Resolved: In the United States, private ownership of handguns ought to be banned. Need: guns or use of guns or who has them… Solvency: Resolu = ban them Alternatives ? More, different regulations Advantages over SQ or Aff Economic, political, social, pragmatic,