The Instigator
TAIDebate09
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
31 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 5 votes the winner is...
Logical-Master
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/5/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,395 times Debate No: 9138
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

TAIDebate09

Pro

Do you think that the Death penalty should be legal everywhere?
Logical-Master

Con

I'm presuming that this debate is intended for me to argue AGAINST the death penalty. Thus, without further ado, let us begin.

==================================================================
CONTENTION 1: The legal system isn't perfect, hence innocents being declared guilty is highly feasible |
==================================================================

One of the main problems with capital punishment is that there have in the past been quite a few people who have been executed only for it to have turned out that these individuals were innocent of the crimes they were accused of all along. The reasons these individuals get declared guilty in the first place is often because they often are unable to financially afford a defense attorney adequate enough to prove their innocence or that the prosecution may simply be too skilled at his/her job for the defense to overcome (the fact that these prosecutors are often encouraged to be performance rather than finding the truth doesn't help the matter) (1).

Without capital punishment, innocents who were declared guilty could at very least have the opportunity for additional evidence to be acquired long after initial trial had passed so that their case could be appealed and so that the state could make amends with the individuals they wrongfully declared guilty; the state wouldn't have blood on its hands

I do have an additional argument, but would first like to know if my opponent has any evidence of the notion that the death penalty is an effective criminal deterrent.

And we'll leave it at that for now.

Sources:

1) http://www.bu.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
TAIDebate09

Pro

TAIDebate09 forfeited this round.
Logical-Master

Con

How boring. Guess there is no need to provide my additional argument. Too bad. Extend.
Debate Round No. 2
TAIDebate09

Pro

"ahem!"

Now, one of the reasons that the death penalty should be legal everywhere is because it is better than the alternative. Lots of criminals locked up and eating taxpayer's money is a VERY big problem. Also, If we just decide to lock people up, we will need more prisons- another chunk out of the taxpayer's pocket. All of this leads to the criminals, with so much that they do not deserve, even if they claim that they have changed, and lots of innocents that are left with lower amounts of money because the government has to raise taxes.

So, you could say that they offend twice: once from their victims, and once from the taxpayer.
Logical-Master

Con

My opponent has opted NOT to address my case by any means and simply claim that the death penalty would be a problem financially. First, I'd like to point out that humans lives trump the value of a dollar any day of the week. As I've pointed out in the first round, innocents are placed at jeopardy due to the faultiness of our legal system. Second, I'm just going to disprove my opponent's position entirely through pointing some facts which indicate that taxpayers lose MORE out of their pocket with the death penalty being upheld.

The following has been taken from this debate: http://www.debate.org...

" Financial Factors:
a) The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life. Taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each of the state's executions. (L.A. Times, March 6, 2005)
b) In Kansas, the costs of capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-capital cases, including the costs of incarceration. (Kansas Performance Audit Report, December 2003).
c) In Indiana, the total costs of the death penalty exceed the complete costs of life without parole sentences by about 38%, assuming that 20% of death sentences are overturned and reduced to life. (Indiana Criminal Law Study Commission, January 10, 2002).
d) The most comprehensive study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million per execution over the costs of sentencing murderers to life imprisonment. The majority of those costs occur at the trial level. (Duke University, May 1993).
e) Enforcing the death penalty costs Florida $51 million a year above what it would cost to punish all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole. Based on the 44 executions Florida had carried out since 1976, that amounts to a cost of $24 million for each execution. (Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000).
f) In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992)."

-studentatheletechristian

Every ounce of information here can be found in this source: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...

And there you have it. It turns out that it actually costs MORE to utilize the death penalty system.

Whereas it is a pity that my opponent couldn't have actually debated against me in this debate, it matters little. Given that he has dropped my previous argument and given that I have refuted his position entirely, it is only reasonable to vote CON.

Cheerio. :D
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
No need for an RFD, Con took this one.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
TAIDebate09Logical-MasterTied
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 patsox834 7 years ago
patsox834
TAIDebate09Logical-MasterTied
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:06 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
TAIDebate09Logical-MasterTied
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:04 
Vote Placed by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
TAIDebate09Logical-MasterTied
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 Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
TAIDebate09Logical-MasterTied
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