The Instigator
light_strike
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
monethys
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Capital Punishment

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 1 vote the winner is...
monethys
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/1/2015 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 470 times Debate No: 67711
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

light_strike

Con

In this debate pro will have to prove that the death penalty can be justified.

Round 1: Accepting
Round 2: Opening Argument
Round 3: Open Debate
Round 4: Open Debate
Round 5: Closing Arguments
monethys

Pro

I accept this debate.
I will be advocating in favor of Capital Punishment as the highest form of sanction to used against those committing heinous, premeditated crimes.
Debate Round No. 1
light_strike

Con

I am opposed to the death penalty because of the power it places in the hands of other humans. If somebody kills another person, only to be killed themselves does it resolve anything? After Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed President John F. Kennedy he himself was shot and killed by Jack Ruby. Ruby was then arrested and sentenced to death. Jack Ruby executed Lee Harvey Oswald. Had Ruby not passed away prior to his execution date the executor would have been as guilty as he was. Which is murder.
A staggering number of innocent people have been executed and many more put on death row before being exonerated. A life in prison sentence has an easy fix if new evidence comes up that proves the inmates innocence. Nobody can be brought back to life.
monethys

Pro

I am in favor of the death penalty, because it is evident that, if implemented correctly, it can save innocent lives.

The Death Penalty deters murder
Until relatively recently there was little consensus on the impact of the death penalty on murder rates, however in the last decade, nine of twelve referenced academic studies by notable economists concluded that the death penalty does, in fact, deter murders[1]. Among the conclusions of those studies was one that determined each execution deters an average of 18 murders [2]. Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14[3].
A controversial study conducted to evaluate the evidence of the "innocent executed" is the Bedau-Radelet Study. The study concluded that 23 innocent persons had been executed since 1900. However, the studies methodology was so flawed that at least 12 of those cases had no evidence of innocence and substantial evidence of guilt[4]. The remaining 11 cases represent 0.14% of the 7,800 executions which have taken place since 1900. And, there is, in fact, no proof that those 11 executed were innocent. Even if one uses the apparently most conservative numbers, we can calculate that the death penalty has deterred 7,800*3=~23400 murders of innocents and executed 11 innocents (which have not been conclusively proved innocent either). Thus, it is simply not true that a staggering number of innocent persons have been executed, as previously noted, yet even if it where true, the number of innocent lives saved by the death penalty exceed those that have been executed by a factor of ~20000%.

Con argues that the state should not hold power over others, which contradicts the very nature and function of the state: to distribute power and resources. Con also argues that the state should not have jurisdiction over death, as murder is murder. Whilst I sympathise with this sentiment, it is evident to me that the murder of innocents is wrong, and that implementation of the Death Penalty will reduce it.

References:
[1] http://www.prodeathpenalty.com...
[2] http://www.wesleylowe.com...
[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[4] http://books.google.ca...
Debate Round No. 2
light_strike

Con

light_strike forfeited this round.
monethys

Pro

I extend all my arguments, as my opponent has not provided any further points.
Debate Round No. 3
light_strike

Con

light_strike forfeited this round.
monethys

Pro

Once again I shall extend my arguments in the vain hope that I will have something to argue against in the next round.
Debate Round No. 4
light_strike

Con

light_strike forfeited this round.
monethys

Pro

Well, there it is. It was stated that the Burden of Proof was upon me to prove that Capital Punishment can be justified, and I have done so, proving that it can save innocent lives through acting as a deterrent.
Therefore, I advise you to vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
light_strikemonethysTied
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: ff