The Instigator
MasturDbtor
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
debater32
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Allow Inmates On Death Row Or In Life Without Parole The Option of Suicide

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,987 times Debate No: 25890
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

MasturDbtor

Pro

It's simple. The more inmates there are the more it costs taxpayers and if the person is on death row or life without the possibility of parole there is no chance the person will rejoin society.If the inmate wants to die in that case then it is a win-win to let him/her do it. Taxpayers save money and the inmate is spared further suffering.But there must be (a) formal way(s) of doing this. This is to make sure it is voluntary. We could allow the inmate even if they are serving life and not on death row to voluntarily use the execution chamber. A better way would be to retire lethal injection and electrocution and introduce guillotines, whether the state has the death penalty or not to provide a painless method of death that also allows for "organ donation" if the inmate so chooses.

EDIT: We could even allow "choose your mode of death" for people who want suicide.

Note: This debate does not concern the validity of the death penalty, it is just saying that as long as we have it we might as well allow death row inmates to volunteer to kick the bucket early, and whether we have it or not inmates serving life without parole should have the right too.
debater32

Con

I accept this debate and all terms and conditions. Over to Pro for his main argument.
Debate Round No. 1
MasturDbtor

Pro

As I've said it's a simple economic argument, this will save the state money.

Oftentimes when people try to argue for a right to commit suicide one rebuttal is that by killing themselves they are depriving society of their productivity and so the state has an interest in preventing suicide.

However, this interest does NOT exist when it comes to people on death row or serving for life. They will never become productive members of society.

Furthermore, this is "win-win", society wins by saving money and inmates win by getting to die as they choose.

Prison costs are enormous.
"Vera researchers found that the total taxpayer cost of prisons in the 40 states that participated in this study was 13.9 percent higher than the cost reflected in those states" combined corrections budgets. The total price to taxpayers was $39 billion, $5.4 billion more than the $33.5 billion reflected in corrections budgets alone."
http://www.vera.org...

This is a very simple way we can reduce costs without violating anybody's rights, and in fact granting a right and alleviating some inmates' discomfort. It's win-win.
debater32

Con

debater32 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
MasturDbtor

Pro

All arguments extended.
debater32

Con

debater32 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
MasturDbtor

Pro


Extended.
debater32

Con

debater32 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
MasturDbtor

Pro

Extended.

Well, looks I win.
debater32

Con

debater32 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MasturDbtor 4 years ago
MasturDbtor
Use as many reasons as possible that way you have more chances of being right.
Posted by cmwestbrook 4 years ago
cmwestbrook
spare the criminal of discomfort? why? weak argument! you should stick to just the economical reason if you want to win.
Posted by muzebreak 4 years ago
muzebreak
So, now you're saying that without the body the brain can't feel pain? Do you have any factual evidence of this? Because I can give factual evidence against it, namely phantom limb syndrome. There's also the fact that I have a quote from a person with a doctorate in various medical disciplines, Dr Harold Hillman, and you have an assertion that you're right. I think I win, but if you'd like to continue this you're more then welcome to challenge me to a debate on it.
Posted by cmwestbrook 4 years ago
cmwestbrook
One would believe that there is a brief moment in time, when the blade strikes the neck, prior to it severing the spinal cord and head, that the subject would feel pain. The point is moot because the American public would never come to agree to it. It's hard enough trying to legalize euthanasia for people in pain and/or dying of serious medical conditions.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 4 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
Without the Brain connected to the rest of the body, there would be no way to feel the pain.
Posted by cmwestbrook 4 years ago
cmwestbrook
Pro -- saves the tax payers money
Con -- the purpose of serving time in jail is punishment... if they kill themselves, they are escaping the suffering
Posted by muzebreak 4 years ago
muzebreak
A quote from an article in new scientist magazine by Dr. Harold Hillman entitled "An unnatural way to die".

"death occurs due to separation of the brain and spinal cord, after transection of the surrounding tissues. This must cause acute and possibly severe pain."
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 4 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
Yes it is, your head being severed means instantanious death or unconsciousness lead to death.
Posted by muzebreak 4 years ago
muzebreak
Because it isn't painless.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 4 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
Why not? It saves the state money.
No votes have been placed for this debate.