The Instigator
Marine_to_be
Con (against)
Losing
23 Points
The Contender
JustCallMeTarzan
Pro (for)
Winning
36 Points

Death Penalty

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/2/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,963 times Debate No: 3034
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (13)

 

Marine_to_be

Con

-The use of the death penalty is unconstitutional because it is cruel and unusual
-it cost more to put people to death then it dose to keep them in jail.
-Ethically who are we to decide who lives and dies if we execute someone dosent that make us just as bad as them?
-innocent people die!
-no justice done.
-another innocent family has to go through the pain of loosing someone
-life in prison is a more effective deterent
-places where the death penalty is used have higher murder rates then states that dont use it
-it would give a good appearance for the european countries who none of them use it.
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

I suppose I'll simply address your points... Not sure why you challenged ME on this issue, but here goes...

>>"-The use of the death penalty is unconstitutional because it is cruel and unusual"

Execution is hardly an unusual punishment - it can be seen present in history from the very beginning of man. While it may be cruel, it is not cruel AND unusual, and thus fails the two-pronged test to see if it is unconstitutional. Also, the determination of what is cruel and unusual is the responsibility of the legislature and judiciary of the states. However, the Supreme Court has only ruled that there is to be no MANDATORY death penalty. Objectively, from a legal standpoint, capital punishment is constitutional.

>>"-it cost more to put people to death then it dose to keep them in jail."

Illogical - this is a unilateral statement that does not take into account the age of the individual, which is in fact the determining factor. It costs much more to keep an 18-year old in prison until he dies than to execute him. Also, the fact that there is the possibility of pleading guilty and avoiding the death penalty reduces this argument to nonsense. The easiest way to fight the death penalty is to plead guilty.

>>"-Ethically who are we to decide who lives and dies if we execute someone dosent that make us just as bad as them?"

We are the executors of social contract, which the accused is a de facto signatory to. Social contract states that some people are such a danger to society that they must be permanently removed for the public good. Ethically, we simply follow the precept of "an eye for an eye" - equal remuneration.

>>"-innocent people die!"

Yes, that happens. However, that's a problem with the judicial process, not capital punishment - an entirely different debate.

>>"-no justice done."

Justice is a subjective determination. Objectively, justice is simply fair. An eye for an eye is the ultimate fairness - again, equal remuneration.

>>"-another innocent family has to go through the pain of loosing someone"

I'm sure this is our fault, not the fault of the murderer convicted and sentenced to death.

>>"-life in prison is a more effective deterent "

Again - this is a subjective determination. Objectively, the vast majority of people prefer to live than die.

>>"-places where the death penalty is used have higher murder rates then states that dont use it"

You've performed a wonderful example of the chicken-egg argument fallacy considering causation. It's equally likely that states with higher death rates feel they need the death penalty as an additional deterrent, and states with a low murder rate feel they don't need capital punishment.

>>"-it would give a good appearance for the european countries who none of them use it."

How compelling. Some European countries are moving towards Socialist Democracies as well. Let's copy the Europeans in politics too because they obviously have things together and are far superior to us. By the way, the EU and the Council of Europe require member states to abolish the death penalty - so even if they wanted to use it, their interest in the benefits of the EU outweigh their interest in capital punishment.
Debate Round No. 1
Marine_to_be

Con

Ok how can you say that it is usual to strap a person down to a table and inject him with poisons that will kill him. how is it usual to strap a person to a chair with sponges up there buts and masks over there face to keep them from vomiting and craping all over the place while your send thousands of volts through there body there is not anything usual about that.

when on death row you have a unlimited amout of appeals that are all paid for by our court systems. plus various other expences so yes even an 18 yr old sitting in jail for the rest of there life is cheaper then the death penalty. infact it cost.

At the trial level, death penalty cases are estimated to generate roughly $470,000 inadditional costs to the prosecution and defense over the cost of trying the same case as an aggravated murder without the death penalty and costs of $47,000 to $70,000 for court personnel.

On direct appeal, the cost of appellate defense averages $100,000 more in death penalty cases, than in non-death penalty murder cases.

Personal restraint petitions filed in death penalty cases on average cost an additional$137,000 in public defense costs. this came from (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...)

which actually goes more in debth but it actually cost about 3 times more to put someone to death

when innocent people die that is an issue with the death penalty. because if the death penalty was not used then those people would have a chance to prove. the death penalty is too perminate.

isnt life enough because studies show that people when kept away from other people go crazy and nuts litterally. and there life is over anyway so this is a worse punishment.
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

>>"Ok how can you say that it is usual to strap a person down to a table and inject him with poisons that will kill him. how is it usual to strap a person to a chair with sponges up there buts and masks over there face to keep them from vomiting and craping all over the place while your send thousands of volts through there body there is not anything usual about that."

You argue the specifics of the nature of execution. We're talking about capital punishment in general. Appealing to specifics is immaterial when considering execution as a general topic. If you want to debate methods, fine, but it needs to be done on a state-by-state basis. Obviously there are states where this is NOT unusual.

>>"when on death row you have a unlimited amout of appeals that are all paid for by our court systems. plus various other expences so yes even an 18 yr old sitting in jail for the rest of there life is cheaper then the death penalty. infact it cost."

Again - the fact that the appeals of inmates are paid for by the court is a failure of the judiciary system. Wonderful - I'm interested in capital punishment, not the failures of the judiciary system.

>>"At the trial level, death penalty cases are estimated to generate roughly $470,000 in additional costs to the prosecution and defense over the cost of trying the same case as an aggravated murder without the death penalty and costs of $47,000 to $70,000 for court personnel. On direct appeal, the cost of appellate defense averages $100,000 more in death penalty cases, than in non-death penalty murder cases. Personal restraint petitions filed in death penalty cases on average cost an additional $137,000 in public defense costs."

You want to argue economics... very well... "Total annual costs for all U.S. Prisons, State and Federal, was $17.7 billion in 1994 along with a total prison population of 1.1 million inmates. That amounts to $16100 per inmate/year.
(GOA report and testimony FY-97 GGD-97-15)." Keeping an inmate alive to the average age of 75 costs about $805,000 if they are 25 at the time of imprisonment. If they are 18, that figure rises to $917,700. Inmates only need to spend a little over 62 years in prison to cost 1 million to taxpayers, NOT COUNTING MEDICAL EXPENSES AS THEY AGE. It's perfectly reasonable for a person to live to 80. Imprisoned at 18, lives till 80 = 1 Million.

You argue that it costs roughly $800,000 assuming ALL the above costs from your copied argument are actual. This is still less than 50 years in prison. And on top of that, here's an interesting little fact:

The cost for the lethal injection drugs is only about $86 (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us...) So somehow, the costs associated with the death penalty must go from that $86 to nearly $800,000 in costs OTHER THAN COURT CASES for the argument against the death penalty to hold water. Because the inmate could appeal his case and win, making the costs not relevant to the case.

Lets consider a guilty person in a trial where the death penalty is sought. If they plead guilty and go to prison, they cost the taxpayer the $800,000 and are not killed. If they are guilty and given the death penalty, they cost the persons financially responsible for the guilty party the additional $470,000, plus the cost of injection ($86). The taxpayer's cost is IMMENSELY less to kill a person, rather than keep him alive for 50 years.

There's also the consideration of the taxpayer - do they want to pay to keep a criminal alive, or do they want to pay to kill him? Current figures say about 65% will pay to kill him.

>>"when innocent people die that is an issue with the death penalty. because if the death penalty was not used then those people would have a chance to prove. the death penalty is too perminate."

When innocent people die, that is obviously because the court has improperly rendered a verdict. Blaming the death penalty for these deaths is like saying that if someone aims a gun at the wrong target the gun is to blame for the death. That's ludicrous. The court is at fault for innocent deaths, not the death penalty. Besides, if they're innocent and get life in prison, you've argued that this is a worse penalty... so by your own logic, we should keep the death penalty because to do otherwise would impose a worse punishment on the innocent.

>>"isnt life enough because studies show that people when kept away from other people go crazy and nuts litterally. and there life is over anyway so this is a worse punishment."

Somehow execution is cruel and unusual but purposeful degradation into insanity is not? I'm not sure I follow your (lack of) logic on this one...
Debate Round No. 2
Marine_to_be

Con

Marine_to_be forfeited this round.
JustCallMeTarzan

Pro

Sigh.... with no further refutation, my arguments stand as they are. No need for another post because I have nothing to argue against. Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Con has the complete knockout argument in:
"-innocent people die!"
Sometimes even people who confess to murder are innocent.
Very odd for a marine-to-be to think this way, but keep it up!! It could have a profound effect!

I completely agree with Tarzan's last paragraph in round 1.
Possibly the best thing that could happen. :-)

Cheers
Posted by attrition 8 years ago
attrition
I am against the death penalty but voted for the pro because I don't think Con had a very good argument and forfeited his last round.

I would like to say this:

A person commits murder for ONLY three reasons to which the death penalty does not deter:

1. Compulsion: Serial killers/rapists. Real sickos that kill for pleasure and can't or won't stop. Often they cover their crimes up because they don't want to get caught, they know it is wrong, or at least they know they will either go to prison or get the death penalty. Either way, the fear of death won't stop this.

2. Passion: A husband catching his wife getting tag teamed by his two best friends. Snaps and kills everybody. Do you think that this person is worried about the death penalty? They worry after the fact, but it still does not prevent the murder.

3. Greed: Simple money or power. They never think they will get caught. Fear will not stop them.

The justice system is flawed, people lie and makes mistakes. A human system will never be absolutely perfect.The death penalty is the state's vengeance upon an individual. It is immoral are based on old laws that the human race will eventually evolve out of. Life in prison is to prevent further death and to have the ability to correct errors. If someone is actually caught in the act or pleads guilty with no hesitation, then by all means lock them up in a little tiny room with little to no access to others and 1 book a week. Now with a lifetime to think about what they have done and where they are at, that's a real punishment.
Posted by Anonymous 8 years ago
Anonymous
the real question is WHY it costs so much and takes so long to execute someone. The answer is because the courts are the ones getting paid to deal with it. Let me paint you a picture:

judge: "So let me get this straight, you raped and killed those women and kept their fingernails as trophies"

serial rapist/murderer: "Yes, I did. It was awesome".

judge: "baliff..."

baliff: *draws pistol* bang bang. problem solved.

Common sense people. As soon as enough of you wake up we can do something about the real problems.
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Vote Placed by DeadLeaves93 7 years ago
DeadLeaves93
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by jiffy 8 years ago
jiffy
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Kmille11014 8 years ago
Kmille11014
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Marine_to_beJustCallMeTarzanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30