The Instigator
ryan_thomas
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
devinni01841
Con (against)
Winning
32 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
Pro Tied Con
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/3/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,172 times Debate No: 18163
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)

 

ryan_thomas

Pro

I propose a debate on the death penalty, I will be Pro and you will be Con. The first round is just for accpetance. Good luck.
devinni01841

Con

I accept your challenge.

Your argument?
Debate Round No. 1
ryan_thomas

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for her accpetance, now on with the debate.

Case

I will be affirming the resolution that the death penalty is justified and that it should be kept as a punishment. My next contentions will show why it is a good form of punishment.


Contention 1: Just must be served.

My first point will be that justice must be served. The death penalty is only reserved for those who commit a act of murder. It is crucial that in a just society, the punishment must fit the crime. If a person violates another person's right to life, then justice demands that the violator's right to life be violated.


Contention 2: The death penalty works as deterent.

People who love their lives will not do anything to put it in jeperdy. So, sense murder ia a crime that is punishable by death, people will not murder.

A great example would be Japan. They have the death penalty, and also have the lowest murder rate of anyother advanced country in the world [1].


Contention 3: The death penalty saves the lives of innocent people.

The death penalty can and has saved tons of innocent lives. Studies have shown that in the U.S. 1.2% of offenders who committed murder were arrested within 3 years of being realeased because they murdered another person [2]. The number must become a zero. How do we do this? The death penalty, because it is the only way to make sure that the killers wont kill again.

Conclusion

Due to the fact that if a person kills a person then they themselves must also be killed, and that puting the murderer to death is the only way to make sure they do not murder anymore, it is just too make it a punishment whereever it is not.

Vote Pro!


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov...
devinni01841

Con

Thank you posting your argument quickly.

For the sake of clarity, I offer some definitions.

Death penalty – Capital Punishment; putting one to death for crimes that one has committed.

Justified - to prove or show to be just, right, or reasonable [1]

Should - used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency [2]

Justice - the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law [3]
*****
First I will address your points, then continue to my own.

Your first argument is that "justice must be served".

However, who's standard of justice are you speaking of? Not the standard of the 29% of Americans who are against the death penalty. [4] That may seem like a relatively small number, but when you do the math, that is an estimated 90,519,935 Americans that do not support capital punishment.

You then claim that the death penalty works as deterrent.

While your logic makes sense when applied to average people, Murderers, (serial killers in particular) often have Antisocial Personality Disorder. (Also known as psychopaths) [5] These people do not subscribe to social norms, and they do not ‘gel' with society. They are in a class all their own.

By the time they commit a murder, they will most likely have decided that the thrill (or whatever pleasure they get) from the kill is more important than their lives.

Your final argument is that the death penalty saves the lives of innocent people because "that in the U.S. 1.2% of offenders who committed murder were arrested within 3 years of being released because they murdered another person" , but you never say how many people this actually is.
*****
Now I have two main points as to why the death penalty should be repealed.
First "The cost of killing killers is killing us." (Ed Barnes)[6] This article goes on to say that a death-penalty trial costs $1 million more than one in which prosecutors seek life without parole. Furthermore, an Urban Institute study of Maryland's experience with the death penalty found that since 1978, the cost to taxpayers for the five executions the state carried out was $37.2 million dollars — each. This comes out to 186 million dollars. The Death Penalty Information Center [7] states that "It is much cheaper to put these people in prison and leave them there until they die."

Better yet, when these people are put in prison, they should be put to work. They once were a detriment to society; they should do some good before they leave this world. Prison is essentially a free ride; one gets clean clothes, hot food, and a bed to sleep in at the expense of the general population. Sending prisoners to work may offset the costs of keeping them imprisoned, and the money spent by the public defending them.

My second point is hundreds of years old. 235 years old to be exact. Our great country has what is called the Declaration of Independence, which not only turned us into America, but guaranteed "Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness" [8]. Life is the most basic of human rights. To take the life of even a murderer, puts one on that same level, and makes one a murderer themselves.

In conclusion, because the death penalty is not necessarily a deterrent to criminals, and because capital punishment is expensive, and because taking the lives of murderers makes America's justice system hypocritical, I urge you to please vote CON!
*****
Sources:
[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[2] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[3] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[4] http://www.gallup.com...
[5] http://people.howstuffworks.com...
[6] : http://www.foxnews.com...
[7] http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
[8] http://www.earlyamerica.com...
Debate Round No. 2
ryan_thomas

Pro

ryan_thomas forfeited this round.
devinni01841

Con

I see my opponent has forfeited this round, extend arguments, and please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
ryan_thomas

Pro

ryan_thomas forfeited this round.
devinni01841

Con

My opponent has also forfeited the final round of our debate.
Please vote Con!
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
I'll debate con on this of she wants, there will be no forfeits that time
Posted by devinni01841 5 years ago
devinni01841
Oh, no worries.
Posted by ryan_thomas 5 years ago
ryan_thomas
I apologize for forfeiting round 3, school is starting to take up a lot of my time. :(
Posted by ryan_thomas 5 years ago
ryan_thomas
Ok :)
Posted by devinni01841 5 years ago
devinni01841
I've seen your argument, but I can't post tonight. I'll get back to you first thing in the morning, mmkay? <3
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: F.F.
Vote Placed by THE_OPINIONATOR 4 years ago
THE_OPINIONATOR
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: The Pro side of this debate had barely any arument in the first round, Con had a more effective clarified argument that was easier for me to follow.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by Cerebral_Narcissist 5 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Up until round 2 I thought the arguments were pretty tied, forfeiting half the debate leads to a default 7 points for devinni.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
ryan_thomasdevinni01841Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wins conduct due to forfeit. Con wins arguments, because con successfully refuted all f pro's contentions (what standard of justice, ect.) and hers were untouched.