The Instigator
policydebategod
Con (against)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
repete21
Pro (for)
Winning
25 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: 12/17/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,703 times Debate No: 594
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (12)

 

policydebategod

Con

The Death Penalty
- is murder, which is morally wrong. It is not the government's place to murder people without war.
- Nobody is afriad of the death penalty so it is ineffective. People are afriad of prison. You never hear, "I would but I don't want to get the death penalty." You do hear, "I would. I don't want to go to jail."
- It kills people instead of allowing them to pay for their crimes.
- The appeal process is too great for a death penalty person. They can get acquitted any time wrongfully.
- Capital punishment is cruel and unusual, violating the constitution. Next, we will get rid of freedom of speech, religion, etc. It is destroying American values.
- The death penalty is used disproportionately against the poor, who cannot afford expensive legal counsel, as well as racial, ethnic and religious minorities.
- The death penalty is applied arbitrarily and inconsistently.
- Wrongly convicted, innocent people have received death penalty sentences, and tragically, were killed by the state. People are released from jail constantly for crimes they did not commit. Imagine if you were suddenly murdered for a crime you did not commit.
- A rehabilitated criminal can make a morally valuable contribution to society.
- Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life.
- The endless appeals and required additional procedures clog our court system and make speedy trials impossible as well.
- We as a society have to move away from the "eye for an eye" revenge mentality if civilization is to advance.
- It sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. Should we rape people who rape people? Speed toward who speed? Kidnap people who kidnap? It teaches no lesson. This is exactly what law is trying to get away from by allowing the government to punish instead of allowing people to get personal revenge.
- Why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. Should we rape people who rape people? No lesson is learned.
- Other countries (especially in Europe) would have a more favorable image of America. And we could have more help in our military and economic ventures.
- Most jury members are reluctant to convict if it means putting someone to death. Letting murderers roam free.
- The prisoner's family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process.
repete21

Pro

I will answer each of your arguments in the order you posted them.

Murder-1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

Justice-c: the administration of law

The death penalty clearly isn't murder, but rather justice, because it isn't unlawful, and it is the administration of the law.

We don't use the death penalty to make the person scared, we use it to serve justice, and prevent anyone from ever doing what they have done again.

We serve justice to make our country safe, not to make criminals pay for their crimes. If we wanted them to pay we wouldn't spend so much tax money on prisons.

You state that you can be aqquited wrongly, but yet you don't deserve the punishment? That doesn't make sense.

Please show me where exactly in the Constitution it states that the death penalty shouldn't be allowed.

Cruel-1: disposed to inflict pain or suffering

Unusual- not accordant with usage, custom, or habit

The death penalty is used in a way which is quick, and painless, also it has been around for centuries upon centuries, and is not at all unusual.

We shouldn't take away the death penalty because it is used unfairly, does that mean we should take away prisons too? Economic status, and race can effect sentence time, and whether or not you go too, then should we ban colleges? The poor can't afford college, it is clearly unfair to them. Maybe what you meant to say was that the administration of the death penalty should be better regulated.

Same as above.

Being wrongly convicted is nearly unheard of with today's technology.

A criminal is also statistically proven to commit another crime. Do we really want repeat offenses by people who's first crimes were bad enough for the death penalty?

We shouldn't let criminals get by just because it is expensive to serve justice. Educating people who aren't in the United States legally costs millions, but we still do that don't we?

You have stated above that it is important innocent people don't get what they don't deserve, this is why we have appeals.

Crimes worthy of the death penalty are much more than a painless lethal injection.

We don't kill people for the sake of the fact that they have killed someone, you have to do much more than just kill someone for the death penalty, and we do it to keep the public safe.

Same as above.

We need to worry about the safety of the public, and serving justice, before we worry about foreign affairs.

We must think about the safety of the public, and what the victims families have been through.

To add to my arguments I would like to note that the death penalty is used sparingly, and crimes punishable by death are far worse than just murder. If we don't give these people what they deserve, we are allowing them to live for free off of the peoples taxes, without getting what they deserve, and, in a sense, they get away with their crime. If someone knows that they can kill, and live to tell about it, the chances of them doing it are greater, putting society in danger.

You seem to have focused on cost, fairness, and morale example, but these aren't even caused by the death penalty, and you have forgotten the real reasons for the death penalty, the safety of the public, and justice.
Debate Round No. 1
policydebategod

Con

- The death penalty clearly isn't murder, but rather justice, because it isn't unlawful, and it is the administration of the law.
+ Justice is not the practice of law but rather making things right. Is arresting blacks for months for j - walking justice during the civil rights era? Is lynching Irish men for being too close to town justice? The death penalty is murder because it is kiling people. Essentially, it is revenge. Why is it fine for the government to kill a person for killing a person and not a person to kill anothe person. Whydon;t we let victims; families murder the murderer if your point is logical?

- We don't use the death penalty to make the person scared, we use it to serve justice, and prevent anyone from ever doing what they have done again.
+ Life in prison keeps people out of society and the overcrwding of the prisons is not so serious of an issue that you have to kill off the criminals one by one so there will be more space.

- We serve justice to make our country safe, not to make criminals pay for their crimes. If we wanted them to pay we wouldn't spend so much tax money on prisons.
+ Prisons make people pay BIG. Their whole life is not only taken away but allowed to live miserably. Prisons make our country just as safe if not safeer than the death penalty.

- You state that you can be aqquited wrongly, but yet you don't deserve the punishment? That doesn't make sense.
+ I mean that you can be accused wrongly and then you will get murdered. People are released from prison for crimes they did not commit constantly.

- Please show me where exactly in the Constitution it states that the death penalty shouldn't be allowed.
+ 8th Ammendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

- Cruel-1: disposed to inflict pain or suffering
Unusual- not accordant with usage, custom, or habit
+ To die is to make one suffer the realization of finality of life. The process of making somebody know that they will be murdered is cruel.
The death penalty was not enacted until recently.
You dont say where you got your definition. You could have defined these words.

- The death penalty is used in a way which is quick, and painless, also it has been around for centuries upon centuries, and is not at all unusual.
+ Making somebody know that they will never live again is not painless.

- We shouldn't take away the death penalty because it is used unfairly, does that mean we should take away prisons too? Economic status, and race can effect sentence time, and whether or not you go too, then should we ban colleges? The poor can't afford college, it is clearly unfair to them. Maybe what you meant to say was that the administration of the death penalty should be better regulated.
+ All of these things are reversible. You can release somebody from prison, give them parole, allow them into your college, etc but you cant give them life.

- Being wrongly convicted is nearly unheard of with today's technology.
+ People can constantly be convicted from angry juries and DNA testing releases people constantly.

- A criminal is also statistically proven to commit another crime. Do we really want repeat offenses by people who's first crimes were bad enough for the death penalty?
+ Show me the actual statistics.
Prisons can hold people so that they never commit another crime.

- We shouldn't let criminals get by just because it is expensive to serve justice. Educating people who aren't in the United States legally costs millions, but we still do that don't we?
+ Its an unecessary expense and illegals' education is necessary.

- You have stated above that it is important innocent people don't get what they don't deserve, this is why we have appeals.
+ Appeals dont ALWAYS work.

- Crimes worthy of the death penalty are much more than a painless lethal injection.
+ Not true. These crimes include rape and plain murder including: LETHAL INJECTIONS!!!

- We don't kill people for the sake of the fact that they have killed someone, you have to do much more than just kill someone for the death penalty, and we do it to keep the public safe.
+ You keep making this point. Prisons keep people from committing second crimes.

- We need to worry about the safety of the public, and serving justice, before we worry about foreign affairs.
+ Foreign affairs is safety of the public. Its our economy and how they feel militarily about us. Also, death penalties dont keep us any more safe than prisons.

- We must think about the safety of the public, and what the victims families have been through.
+ PRISONS!!! PRISONS!!! PRISONS!!!

- To add to my arguments I would like to note that the death penalty is used sparingly, and crimes punishable by death are far worse than just murder. If we don't give these people what they deserve, we are allowing them to live for free off of the peoples taxes, without getting what they deserve, and, in a sense, they get away with their crime. If someone knows that they can kill, and live to tell about it, the chances of them doing it are greater, putting society in danger.
+ PRISONS!!! You just said "the death penalty is used sparingly", translation: we dont use it often. its just an occasional barbaric murder!!!

PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS PRISONS
repete21

Pro

repete21 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
policydebategod

Con

please make your next arguments. this requires all arguments to be 100 words so im going to write randomness.
repete21

Pro

repete21 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by wheelhouse3 8 years ago
wheelhouse3
repete21 pretty much answered all that for me. i really didn't mean to start a whole other argument in the comments so let them argue this and decide who did a better job.
Posted by shalominthehome 8 years ago
shalominthehome
but after commiting a crime, they're still human. they may not be humane, but it doesn't make them lose their right to life.

again back to the point about right to life for the value of a life vs the value of a dollar

also is every gov't perfect? or jury for that matter? what happens when they're both not right and the innocent person dies?

last but not least, is there a humane way to kill someone? how so?
Posted by wheelhouse3 8 years ago
wheelhouse3
They *chose* to take away someone else's right away from them. They *know* the what the consequences of their actions are and therefore they *do* forfeit their right to life in order to take away another's.

A life *is* more important than money, but a forfeited and corrupt life is not.

Hammurabi's Code allowed no trail by a jury, no appeals, and no mercy. America set up all of those things so that it can be assured that a person's rights are protected and that they really did deserve the consequences.

1/8 yes, but how long ago was that? That information is outdated. Technology has advanced far beyond that. DNA evidence is the most credible evidence you can give in a court case.

If the death penalty were based on the judgements of people, not scientific evidence, and couldn't be appealed than I would be against it. However, it isn't so...
Posted by shalominthehome 8 years ago
shalominthehome
hi wheelhouse3

i dont think that one can really choose to have their right to life away. its inalienable right, that is garanteed (sorry im not the world's best speller) when we are born.

i understand your point of what a criminal would think but if a criminal has privlages taken way, then i think it'd be a little different.

in response to your point of economic effencieny where the criminal just wastes money. i think that a life is more important then a saving money.

can you clarify your response to hammurabi's code? i'm not entirely sure what your saying.

in response to dna testing, according to deathpenaltyinfo.com, 1/8 executed by the death penalty were innocent. how is that just?
Posted by wheelhouse3 8 years ago
wheelhouse3
I strongly disagree with con. In answer to the below comment... You're right. Everyone does have the right to life. However, those people condemned to death have, in most cases, chose to use their right to life to take away another or several others' rights to life. People like that have no place amongst civilized society. What's the other option besides the death penalty? Life in prison? There is overcrowding in jails as it is. Not only that but life in prison often times allows them to have a better life than the one outside prison walls. They can sit there leeching off the tax money of American citizens in an environment in which they thrive and love surrounded by hundreds of others with there same conscience. What punishment is that serving? If I were that kind of criminal, my thoughts would be, 'Heck, this ain't that bad; no work, no bills, I can smuggle in anything I want or need. Some sentence.' My mother, as a Sheriff of the Riverside County Police Department, has informed me on a number of occasions that most criminals actually *enjoy* prison. Therefore, with the absence of a death penalty, America will simply be wasting hard-earned tax money and rewarding criminals for their crimes. They've chosen to waste their right to life by destroying others'. It doesn't resemble the Hammurabi's Code in that the sentenced are given thousands of chances in which to appeal their case and DNA tested so many times, coming to the same conclusion every time, reduces its deffiency. Thus making the chance of an innocent person be executed even less likely. That is an ancient argument for ancient times and has no credibility in an argument like this.
Posted by shalominthehome 8 years ago
shalominthehome
i strongly agree with the con in this case. i think in a just society, death penalty ought not be used as a form of punishment. i think that everyone has the right to life.

- i'd like to use the con's point of hammurabi's code. if one thinks that a life for a life is just and therefore supports hammurabi's code, then maybe they should take into account that back then if a son hit his father, his hand would be cut off.

-also i agree with the con's point of the execution of the innocent. a big factor in finding a criminal to be tried is dna. dna only works 97% of the time- so what about the other 3%? what justice does the death penalty do to the wrongly accused/executed?
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 9 months ago
U.n
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by repete21 7 years ago
repete21
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 KingYosef 8 years ago
KingYosef
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 brie 8 years ago
brie
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 
Vote Placed by behindblueeyes 8 years ago
behindblueeyes
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 
Vote Placed by wheelhouse3 8 years ago
wheelhouse3
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 8 years ago
clsmooth
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 
Vote Placed by james94 8 years ago
james94
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 RepublicanView333 8 years ago
RepublicanView333
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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 
Vote Placed by oboeman 8 years ago
oboeman
policydebategodrepete21Tied
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