The Instigator
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
WillYouMarryMe
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Capital Punishment (death penalty) should be legal in all states

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
WillYouMarryMe
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 862 times Debate No: 71093
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

Do_I_Need_A_Username

Pro

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, should be legal in all states. Currently, it is only legal in 32 states.

Sometimes, the ultimate crime deserves the ultimate punishment. An eye for an eye. Crimes such as, premeditated murder, murder of children, rape of children, etc. These crimes are terrible, and the perpetrator deserves no mercy, as the perpetrator was showing no mercy to his/her victims.

Keeping a convicted murder in prison for life can use various resources. For example, food, money, health care materials. All for what? Keeping someone alive who is going to die in a cell anyway. It would be best to do away with these monsters, rather than keep them alive.

For these reason, it's obvious that the death penalty should be legalized in all of 50 states.
WillYouMarryMe

Con

Pro has burden of proof, so I just have to rebut his points.
I can raise three objections to his case.

1. He never warrants the claim that the "ultimate crime deserves the ultimate punishment". Justice does not necessarily have to be focused on retribution; it can also be focused on rehabilitation, deterrence, or incarceration-- none of those require the severity of the punishment to match the severity of the crime. Pro's argument relies on a completely baseless assumption.

2. The death penalty, as it is practiced in the US, is not necessarily the "ultimate punishment". Being tortured to death or being sentenced to solitary confinement for life could both easily fit that bill; there is really no upper limit to what can be interpreted as being the "ultimate punishment". So if Pro's assumption about retributive justice was warranted, it still wouldn't really lead to the conclusion that the death penalty should be legalized.

3. Pro says that keeping someone in prison for life wastes resources, but that makes no sense because the DP wastes even MORE resources. The average cost of keeping someone in prison for life is $740,000, while the cost of sentencing someone to death (due to the lengthy and expensive appeals process in court) costs $1.26 million [1]. This argument is easily turned against Pro.

All of Pro's arguments have been rebutted.
The resolution is negated.

[1] http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Do_I_Need_A_Username

Pro

Do_I_Need_A_Username forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
WillYouMarryMe

Con

My opponent has conceded the debate in comments.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
I would be happy to debate as Pro.
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Thanks! That was helpful.
Posted by WillYouMarryMe 2 years ago
WillYouMarryMe
1. I didn't actually provide any support those alternative goals of justice, so all that was needed here was a short ethical rationale for retributive justice. You could say that since humans are sentient agents with free will, they are morally culpable for their own actions, and in order for that moral culpability to hold any real meaning, immoral actions must be reciprocated with equal punishment. You could also say that by violating someone else's fundamental human rights, a criminal is essentially forfeiting his own. Then there's also the utilitarian benefit that retributive justice often goes hand in hand with deterrence, since criminals don't want to have to face the consequences of their actions.

2. You could have cited the 8th amendment here to discredit those other punishments as being "cruel and unusual". In other words, the DP is the most humane "ultimate punishment". And also, upon a closer reading of this argument, it doesn't actually condemn the legalization of the DP; it basically just says the DP should be legalized along with other, harsher forms of punishment.

3. Firstly, justice trumps cost. If your ethical case for retributive justice is strong enough, that alone is good enough to refute this. But besides that, the numbers I provided are actually sort of misrepresentative because they are only based on data from California, which is infamous for its ineffective legal system (thus the much higher cost for the DP appeals process); a close analysis of any source is usually enough to reveal at least some sort of flaw like that. And there are also some major cost-savings that come from using the DP in plea-bargaining, which can easily outweigh the cost difference.

hope that helped!
Posted by WillYouMarryMe 2 years ago
WillYouMarryMe
or "I concede the debate" or something along those lines.
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Do I just put "ff" Into the arguments?
Posted by WillYouMarryMe 2 years ago
WillYouMarryMe
Alright. I'll do after this debate gets into the voting period.
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Please do! I would like the advice.
Posted by WillYouMarryMe 2 years ago
WillYouMarryMe
if you want, I can tell you how I would have responded to my rebuttals
Posted by WillYouMarryMe 2 years ago
WillYouMarryMe
ff just means "forfeit"

that's fine! thanks for the debate :)
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
I am unsure what "ff" means. However, I do realize how weak my case is. I apologize but I don't think I will be able to argue this case. I forfeited last round because I was unable to find any counter arguments. Sorry, I'm new to this website and clearly need more experience.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Do_I_Need_A_UsernameWillYouMarryMeTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
Do_I_Need_A_UsernameWillYouMarryMeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: FF