I am the second speaker of the No side of our debate on the last day of the summer camp. The topic is: Assuming that I saw a man stealing an expensive medicine for his dying wife (his wife can only be saved by that medicine, and he really cannot get enough money), should I turn him in?
My opinion is I shouldn't turn him in. My prior speaker said that the man didn't try every possible way to save his wife, and that if we do not turn him in, he might commit crimes again, so I give my rebuttal in my speech.
Firt, let's see what are the things in common about the ways she mentioned. They all need time, but he doesn't have time.
Second, to catch the thief is for making the society fair and let the theif never steal again. He stole for his wife, which is an extreme case, so he is not likely to steal again. If he will not commit crimes again, why can't we let him go and have a happy ending?
Then there's a Point of Information asking me:
"Well, even if he doesn't commit crimes again, I think he should still pay for what he has done."
But if we think about the consequence, we will see that if we turn him in, he will think the world is unfair. His wife may die, too. When he is free from the jail, he may hate the society, then become a real criminal.But before this, he was just a husband who wanted to save his wife. So in our case he is less likely to commit crimes again, which is a better option for him and the society.
刘远萌学员
