The Instigator
lilianhunter
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
WilliamsP
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Death Penalty

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 11 votes the winner is...
WilliamsP
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/30/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,535 times Debate No: 55780
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (24)
Votes (11)

 

lilianhunter

Pro

You say imprisonment is the best route to take, but the death penalty is for INHUMANE crimes. I'm sorry but if it is unjustly to be put to death for murdering, raping, spying, terrorizing; how are those not inhumane as well? Also in prison, prisoners can access books, television, calling and visiting their loved ones, better health coverage than most unemployed Americans and three meals a day. Yes, what a punishment that is.
WilliamsP

Con

My opponent is arguing solely using his opinion. However, I sufficiently argued this in a previous debate: http://www.debate.org...

Many people sentenced to death are actually innocent individuals. If you had done nothing wrong and had no connection to a crime, yet were sentenced to death, what would you think and say? Would you say, "This is so unfair!" or would you say, "Okay, sure, go ahead,"? This is a valid question. My opponent must answer it.


In my previous debate about this topic, I wrote, "It is not our right to choose who lives and dies. That is fate's duty. My opponent's philosophy is clearly "kill and be killed." Granted, when you murder someone, there must be punishments put in place. However, death isn't a punishment. It is an inhumane act. Instead of the death penalty, a suitable punishment would be life in prison. Also, the justice system in the United States is flawed. Often, completely innocent individuals go to prison and sometimes even are put to death. This is injustice."

My challenge is for my opponent to deny that.
Debate Round No. 1
lilianhunter

Pro

Since 1977 there has only been one execution of a man proved innocent in 2014. The majority of men and women sentenced to death row whom are innocent are proved innocent and pulled from death row before execution.
WilliamsP

Con

Two wrongs do not make a right. My opponent should know this. One person kills another and he says he should be killed as well. Death is not a punishment. Life in prison is indeed a punishment.

My opponent argues using his opinion. I argued using facts in my previous debate about his topic. Did my opponent even take the time to read that debate thoroughly? I clearly won and crushed my opponent, showing that the death penalty should not exist.

My opponent has made a claim, yet did not provide a source. That is negligence. If my opponent wants to win this debate, I would suggest that he writes a thorough argument, effectively arguing his stance.
Debate Round No. 2
lilianhunter

Pro

How am I solely arguing my opinion?
A man named Tim spent two years in prison and says
"First off, you get your housing where you will live, then most likely you will be assigned a job such as cook , grounds keeper, field worker etc. since the whole unit is ran by the inmates. After that its a routine of going to work and going to chow and spending the rest of your time in your cell except when your allowed to go to rec and play ball or work out which is generally once a day. You can also apply for classes to try and better educate yourself while your in there to help you when you get out. Its all about repetition every day."
I don't believe you or my opponent will be thinking of simply "an eye for an eye" when it's them or another member of your family.
WilliamsP

Con

My opponent should read my previous debate more thoroughly. I would like to ask him, do two wrongs make a right?
Debate Round No. 3
lilianhunter

Pro

My opponent is now saying a question of an an opinion. Does rewarding murderers, rapists, terrorists, etc. Is that right? Again, prisoners are rewarded with better health care than the average unemployed American. Also, little known fact; prisoners are treated better than the elderly. How does jail solve the issue when statistics show that 67% of prisoners are re-arrested within three years of release. Clearly, life in prison is not a deterrent of crime. My statistics are based on the bipartisan Commision on Safety and Abuse in America's Prisons.
WilliamsP

Con

Clearly there is an issue in this country when prisoners are treated better than the law-abiding citizens. However, that does not, in any way, effectively argue for the death penalty. In my previous debate about this topic, I effectively argued against it and eventually crushed my opponent. My opponent in this debate should thorougly read my previous debate.

None of my opponent's points effectively debate the real issue; whether or not the death penalty is just. Tell me, if a person massacres many innocent individuals, do you want him to endure a real punishment - life in prison - or simply leave this Earth forever - the death penalty? Look, some people are worthy of a second chance. I am wondering, why has my opponent ignored EVERY question I have asked? Every single question and every real point I have made has been ignored.

The better debater shall win. Good luck!
Debate Round No. 4
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lilianhunter 2 years ago
lilianhunter
I'm being nice due to this being public, but the only reason you're being rude is because you have a feeling you lost with no fair game.
GAME.
It is merely a game.
Posted by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
It is too late to cite your sources now, lilianhunter. You should have thought of that while you were debating.
Posted by lilianhunter 2 years ago
lilianhunter
Source number 3.
http://www.bjs.gov...
Posted by lilianhunter 2 years ago
lilianhunter
Source number one on first debate.
A woman anonymous whose husband is in prison says:
"My husband is in prison possibly for life. From what he's told me, even the sex offenders are allowed to have pornography if they request it. The very thing that got many of them started down the road to crime in the first place. They can have pen pals and take advantage of women on the outside to get money, visits, and even a place to go when released. The food is nothing to brag about, the beds are awful, the heat is off many times in the winter ... but they can have television, porn, read books on murder and rape, and be allowed to have contact with strangers. It is really messed up."
Posted by lilianhunter 2 years ago
lilianhunter
If you haven't noticed, this is a website. Not a championship; and even if it was, people decide what they decide. And if you could please not refer to me as 'him'
Posted by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
This debate was misunderstood and misinterpreted.
Posted by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
Lol neither of you "earned victory".... he just earned defeat less than you did.
Posted by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
I will not accept defeat when my opponent has not earned victory.
Posted by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
I would simply like for my voice to be heard. I really despise some of the RFD. I have a right to express my feelings.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro fails to offer any solid premises. On another note I wish con would stop referring back to other debates. Those debates are irrelevant to this one.
Vote Placed by TN05 2 years ago
TN05
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct points are awarded to Pro, as Con basically tried to force Pro to argue facts from another debate. S&G goes to Con as his grammar was clearly better. I'm not awarding arguments because neither side really presented anything other than their own opinion, and I'm not awarding sources as none were used.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 2 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I found this debate lacking in structure and as such it was difficult to decide on a winner as it was all over the place. However, Pro provided no rebuttals to questions and also provided no sources. For this reason Con gets argument points. Regarding the conduct point, I feel both debaters could have been more respectful and as such I am not awarding points. S&G is shared as again this debate was difficult to digest. Sources points are shared, as none were provided. Lastly, I gather this debate is a spillover from a comments or forum argument. However, it is important to make a coherent argument for the sake of the readers that do not want to search through background arguments.
Vote Placed by MyDinosaurHands 2 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't believe either debater deserves points. It seems conduct was equal, there were no forfeited rounds, and there was no name-calling. For sources, Pro used what I presume were real statistics and statements, but they were not sourced, therefore their authenticity cannot be proven, and thus do not factor into the arguments as heavily as they could've. S&G, Pro's structure didn't look as good, but I don't think he had bad poor spelling or grammar. As for the arguments, the primary argument of Con, which was, "Look at my previous debate", seems illegitimate to me. DDO would be a much worse place if people debated like this, and I refuse to reward its practice. I leave the args as a tie because Pro and Con both argued from subjective viewpoints, without leaving much but a position statement (i.e. prison really isn't a bad place OR two wrongs don't make a right). If Pro had used sources for his statistics in Rounds 1, 2, and 3, I would have voted for him. FURTHER RFD IN COMMENTS
Vote Placed by progressivedem22 2 years ago
progressivedem22
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RfWLPAk393fNJJGeXjHUIO7ugF_5cbLxpe92kacbvOY/edit
Vote Placed by YYW 2 years ago
YYW
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Was this a debate about who won a previous debate? That's what it looked like, and generally those kinds of debates aren't advisable. PRO should have just re-argued the issue. Both sides should avail themselves to format their rounds as actual arguments, rather than what transpired here. I do not, however, expect CON to back down from a challenge -however implausibly bad it may have been. Conduct, therefore, to CON. Spelling/grammar/(and structure) was equally unsatisfactory. In this debate, the only rational way to evaluate this is to do so on the basis of the who made more compelling arguments for or against the death penalty. PRO didn't make arguments, neither did CON. Both, then, are a tie. Neither used soured at all. That's a tie too. This was exceedingly frustrating to read.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a difficult debate to determine a winner on. There were virtually no hard-evidenced arguments made from either side, but rather just opinions or claims that remained un-sourced for verification purposes. Conduct - Pro. I've noticed that Conduct points have been awarded to Pro due to Con forcing Pro to read his previous debate in order to understand his points. This is indeed an unfair burden placed on Pro and one that should not be done in any debate. Simply post your main contentions from the previous debate if you wish to recycle them. S & G - Con. Pro had a few grammatical errors with improper punctuation placement and posting the same word twice in a row. Small things, but noticeable. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to acknowledge a main argument from Con in R1, and when he would provide rebuttals they were claims that really required sourcing!! The stats and 'Tim says this'... those arguments need proper sourcing. This is what hurt Pro the most. Sources - N/A for either.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Well, this is a first for me - I'm solely awarding conduct to Pro, and nothing else to anyone. Pro, you need to take the time to impact your arguments, and source them as well if you can. You make a lot of claims with a few warrants, and then I don't see why anything matters. It doesn't take much to say why we need to punish criminals who did inhumane things (deterrence, or a discussion of retributive justice might have been enough), or why the death penalty is the most appropriate punishment (criminal's not going to do it again, is he/she?). Con, you kept saying how Pro's lack of sources was so bad, and then proceeded to only source yourself. That's a conduct violation, since referring to a previous debate you've had is not only not evidence, but it's artificially expanding upon your argument. I see one argument you're going for, and that's the innocent losing their lives, something that Pro successfully mitigates. The rest of your points were just begging questions.
Vote Placed by jamccartney 2 years ago
jamccartney
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate did not go well. Con asked Pro some questions of which Pro neglected to answer, so conduct points go to Con.. Pro made some grammar mistakes that bothered me enough to give Con the points. Both debaters made opinion arguments, but accused the other of doing do. Argument points are tied. Furthermore, no one used sources, so the points are tied.
Vote Placed by Khana 2 years ago
Khana
lilianhunterWilliamsPTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: The debate should stay within the debate. Insisting that the other debater read the entire previous debate (and then using an entire round to insist on it again) is really poor conduct. It gives Con a vast amount of room for a huge argument, and takes the debate out of the existing session. If you want to debate something twice, debate it twice.