The Instigator
Psychedelic
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
Dig3stingLizard
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Death Penalty

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 3 votes the winner is...
Psychedelic
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 469 times Debate No: 45431
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Psychedelic

Con

I, Con, will be arguing that the death penalty should not be legal.

My opponent will attempt to disprove my standpoint on this subject.

First round will be Acceptance.
Dig3stingLizard

Pro

I accept this debate and I hope it turns out to be a fantastic debate good sir!
Debate Round No. 1
Psychedelic

Con

I will be proposing four reasons why the Death Penalty should not be utilized in the United States.

Human Error
Humans make mistakes, so it is very possible that the wrong person could get persecuted for a crime. There are many reasons that there would be an error in picking the correct person. There is a lot of pressure put upon persecutors by the community when there is a particularly brutal crime, such as a rape/murder. The increased pressure can cause the prosecutor to make hasty decisions when deciding the verdict so as to appease the need for justice, which can result in the wrong person being put on death row.[1] Putting someone completely innocent to death is a risk that cannot be taken.

Lack of Deterrence
The threat of the death penalty does not often stop people from committing the crimes that could get them put on death row. People who are in a fit of fear or rage, under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, or have a mental disability which causes them to commit the crime are very unlikely to think about the possibility of being executed.[2] As recent as 2011, the murder rate has actually been higher in states that utilized the death penalty.[3] This shows a lack of the death penalty actually deterring crimes, which defeats one of it's main purposes.

Cost
The procedures and trials that must take place in a death penalty case take longer, and are therefore more costly than the average life without parole (LWOP) case. For example, in Colorado, it takes six times more days to settle a capital case than a LWOP case.[4] That, in turn, causes the price to be exponentially higher. The average cost for a federal case in which the death penalty is being sought is $620,932. That is about eight times more expensive than the average federal case where the death penalty is not an element.[4] Though the means of carrying out the execution itself can be considered reasonably priced, the procedures that precede the execution are very expensive.

Hypocrisy
People may see it fit that someone who killed someone should be killed, but wouldn't that mean that the person who carried out the execution of the guilty party deserves to be killed as well? The argument, “an eye for an eye” seems like it makes sense, but in reality, the people carrying out the death penalty would be no better than the person who was executed. It is hypocritical to punish someone for murder by killing them. The death penalty contradicts its motives.

Sources:

[1]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... I: The Danger of Mistaken Executions
[2]http://www.amnestyusa.org...
[3]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
[4]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
Dig3stingLizard

Pro

Dig3stingLizard forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Dig3stingLizard

Pro

Dig3stingLizard forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by justin.graves 2 years ago
justin.graves
PsychedelicDig3stingLizardTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Gotta love a three round full forfeit... Con's arguments were valid and her sources reliable. Honestly, I think her well-thought-out argument may have scared Pro off.
Vote Placed by MyDinosaurHands 2 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
PsychedelicDig3stingLizardTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD should be self-evident, if somebody needs one though I'm happy (well not really) to provide one.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
PsychedelicDig3stingLizardTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has no arguments, hence I award all 7 points to Con. Just disappointing.