The Instigator
the-great-debater
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Death Penalty should be allowed

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...
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/25/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,658 times Debate No: 25823
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

the-great-debater

Pro

I am going to argue for this topic. I believe that death penalty should be allowed in many countries if not all of them.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

I'm not sure why Pro challenged me specifically to this debate, especially given that my profile says I am for the death penalty, but since it was directed towards me I felt obligated to accept.

I thank my opponent for this debate, and am honored to be debating "the-great-debater".

Since my opponent

A) Challenged me
and
B) Is Pro

I feel he should have burden of proof. I will not argue this round so as to let him present his case first. This should be a short and sweet debate.
Debate Round No. 1
the-great-debater

Pro

the-great-debater forfeited this round.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

How unfortunate, my opponent has forfeited. Well, I might as well make an argument anyway.

1. Costs

The Death Penalty is more expensive than life in prison. Therefore, we should not use it.

2. Innocent People

If you throw an innocent person in jail, you can yank them out again if you can show their innocence. You can't bring back someone from the dead.

While these arguments are poor of quality, they are still more than what my opponent provided.

Sources:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
the-great-debater

Pro

First I would like to apologies for forfeiting one of the rounds. It was out of my hands.
So let me start.
Let us first picture a world without death penalty. Well, I see crime rates as high as ever, murders increasing everyday and innocent people not getting their rights back. Chaos roams the streets and people committing crimes to get money and in their heads they know that the worst that can happen to them is prison. For some prison might even be a relief compared to their living standards.
So abolishing death penalty only encourages people to break the law and murder more innocent people. More gangs would form and assassinations increase because of the lower punishment received. Right now, some countries that have death penalty are very fragile. The only line between chaos and peace is death penalty.
Some might say the cost of killing a criminal is not worth it. Well let me tell you one thing, is the cost of safety not worth it? Would you rather have a peaceful community and pay some extra taxes or would you rather pay less tax and live in a dangerous environment.
One of the issues of death penalty is making a mistake in the trails. No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all the time. Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof. We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. However, the risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death penalty cases is very small, and there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976.
Therefore I believe that all the points provided by my opponent are weak and are not strong enough to outweigh the advantages to death penalty.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

It's good to see my opponent returned in time for the last round. With no further ado, I will start rebuttals.

Pro writes "Let us first picture a world without death penalty. Well, I see crime rates as high as ever, murders increasing everyday and innocent people not getting their rights back. Chaos roams the streets and people committing crimes to get money and in their heads they know that the worst that can happen to them is prison. For some prison might even be a relief compared to their living standards."

Just because you see it doesn't make it so. We have places without the death penalty, and they haven't descended into madness. Most rational people wouldn't want to commit crimes anyway, and the lunatics who do commit crimes usually end up imprisoned. I suggest rather than the death penalty, we increase the undesirability of jail. Everyone who is jailed should be forced to do hard labor at below minimum wage, the proceeds of which go to their victim(s) or the prison. This is far more profitable than killing them, as now they are working for their keep and then some.

Pro writes "So abolishing death penalty only encourages people to break the law and murder more innocent people. More gangs would form and assassinations increase because of the lower punishment received. Right now, some countries that have death penalty are very fragile. The only line between chaos and peace is death penalty."

No it doesn't. You still get punished, and it's still not pleasant. No one likes losing their freedoms. For some, being locked in a tightly controlled prison for the rest of their lives is much worse than dying. If you're in a gang, you could face death regularly in gang wars, but being trapped until you die could be much much worse. 139 countries have abolished the death penalty, and they are not desolate wastelands, so it stands to reason that the death penalty is not the most effective method of keeping order.

Pro writes "Some might say the cost of killing a criminal is not worth it. Well let me tell you one thing, is the cost of safety not worth it? Would you rather have a peaceful community and pay some extra taxes or would you rather pay less tax and live in a dangerous environment."

From a perspective of danger, I am not likely to be endangered by someone who is an inmate for life.

Pro writes "One of the issues of death penalty is making a mistake in the trails. No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all the time. Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof. We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. However, the risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death penalty cases is very small, and there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976."

I think a single innocent person being executed would be enough to deter me from the death penalty. If the government has the death penalty at it's disposal for eliminating people, it could easily use that power tyrannically. Pro himself conceded that no justice system is perfect, so why add to it a feature that lets you eliminate someone permanently? You could make a mistake.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Asoz 7 months ago
Asoz
all you have to think about is the fact that an injection to said death reciever can cost roughly 100,000-135,000$ we see that compared to having to feed maintain and uphold the criteria necessary to hold a prisoner for life that can cost upwards of around 380,000$. by the way what would your feelings be about someone who undoubtedly and outright murdered 4 people deserves to livee and breathe and walk and have the potentiality of getting out and doing it again. i really hope that doesnt happen. Your other argument was that when they get wrongly accused of the death penalty they cant be brought back. That is true that they cant be brought back but that is true that that almost never happens and has in fact declined in recent years.
Posted by Mostem.G 5 years ago
Mostem.G
Niggz be trippin
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
@16kadams

I am for the Death Penalty in general, but this guy specifically challenged me and I've only ever ignored a debate sent directly to me once.

Also, you'd almost certainly win. I know the kinds of topics you're good at...
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Con, if you use those same points (longer obviously) I would debate you on this
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Xerge 5 years ago
Xerge
the-great-debaterAlwaysMoreThanYouTied
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: Conduct to Con for the forfeit. Pro made many unsupported assertions that were refuted by Con's stronger case on the death penalty. Pro ultimately did not uphold the burden of proof that the death penalty should be allowed.