The Instigator
Krios_12
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
itsteetime
Pro (for)
Tied
0 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 450 times Debate No: 23549
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Krios_12

Con

The United States has several ways on how criminals should be punished. The most important punishments are serving time in prison and the death penalty. The death penalty is the worst punishment that a judge could sentence a defendant. The death penalty should be removed from the punishments the United States provides for it's defendants, because in many cases it is not a 100% chance that the defendant did in fact commit the crime. In cases where the defendant actually did commit the crime, they should still be convicted a life sentence in prison, rather then the death penalty. If the death penalty is sentenced to a defendant, who according to evidence presented in court did in fact commit the crime, instead of this being the worst thing that could ever happen, it could be an easy way out; the defendant to not serve a life sentence. When it comes to money, the United States may be spending more per having prisoners serve life sentences, then sentencing the life sentence. However, the death penalty is still not a way of justice. The death penalty is a waste of taxpayers money, and has no public safety benefit. Instead, the death penalty has a main motive of revenge, instead of justice. The death penalty can be considered as violating the U.S.Constitution, because it is considered a cruel and unusual punishment, and the guarantees of the due process of law and of equal protection under the law are violated. The States should not give themselves the right to kill human beings, whatever the crime may have been, it is much more revenge than it is justice. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the majority of the law enforcement professionals, surveyed agree that capital punishment does not deter violent crime; a survey of police chiefs nationwide found they rank the death penalty lowest among ways to reduce violent crimes. It is obvious that even law enforcement professionals do not agree with the death penalty. The death penalty does not stop crimes that continue in the streets everyday, it only kills one human being who may have committed the crime they are being accused of. If money is the issue for having too many prisoners, there is such a thing as rehabilitation centers, which is what prisons are sentenced certain amount of time to serve in the first place. It is much better to have someone spend their life in prison, rather then giving them the easy way out through the death penalty. The doubt of someone actually committing the crime they are being accused of, and going forward with the death penalty is a doubt that will not go away. The fact that an innocent human being was sentenced to the death penalty is a life that is lost and cannot be gained back. The fatal constitutional infirmity in the punishment of death, is that it treats members of the human race as nonhuman, as objects to be toyed with and discarded. Lives should not be toyed with when facing a severe punishment as the death penalty. Aside from the death penalty being the worst punishment, the need for a physician to be present to conduct the procedure is in violation of the oath they take upon, which is to protect lives; this erodes public confidence in the medical profession. The use of a physician's clinical skill and judgment for purposes other than promoting an individuals health and welfare undermines a basic ethical foundation of medicine, which is to do no harm. Instead of the death penalty being a way of stopping crimes, the fact that one person is being named for committing a crime is not accurate, it violates the Constitution, and more importantly those physicians who are certified to save lives , are going against their oath and helping with the prosecution.
itsteetime

Pro

The execution method may result in pain, either by accident or as an inescapable consequence of death, does not establish the sort of 'objectively intolerable risk of harm' [quoting the opinion of the Court from Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U. S. 825, 842, 846 (1994)] that qualifies as cruel and unusual. Kentucky has adopted a method of execution believed to be the most humane available, one it shares with 35 other States. Kentucky's decision to adhere to its protocol cannot be viewed as probative of the wanton infliction of pain under the Eighth Amendment. Throughout our history, whenever a method of execution has been challenged in this Court as cruel and unusual, the Court has rejected the challenge. Our society has nonetheless steadily moved to more humane methods of carrying out capital punishment.
Society is justly ordered when each person receives what is due to him. Crime disturbs this just order, for the criminal takes from people their lives, peace, liberties, and worldly goods in order to give himself undeserved benefits. Deserved punishment protects society morally by restoring this just order, making the wrongdoer pay a price equivalent to the harm he has done. This is retribution, not to be confused with revenge, which is guided by a different motive. In retribution the spur is the virtue of indignation, which answers injury with injury for public good. Retribution is the primary purpose of just punishment as such. there are some defendants who have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances present. I believe life is sacred. It cheapens the life of an innocent murder victim to say that society has no right to keep the murderer from ever killing again. In my view, society has not only the right, but the duty to act in self defense to protect the innocent. As of 2008 per Amnesty International, 58 countries, representing about one-third of all countries worldwide, retain the death penalty for ordinary capital crimes, including the United States, plus the following countries:
Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Botswana, Chad, China, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba, Dominica, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Thailand, Trinidad And Tobago, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United States Of America, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe. The United States is the only westernized democracy, and one of the few democracies worldwide, to not have abolished the death penalty.
The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much. Some family members of crime victims may take years or decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Some may never recover. One of the things that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members. It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system. The number of criminal cases that are plea bargained (meaning the accused admits guilt in return for a lesser sentence or some other concession) can be as high as 80 or 90 percent of cases. With the time, cost, and personnel requirements of a criminal case, there really isn't much of a choice. The vast majority of people that are arraigned are in fact guilty of the crime they are accused. Even if you believe a defendant only deserves life in prison, without the threat of a death sentence, there may be no way to get him to plead guilty and accept the sentence. If a case goes to trial, in addition to the enormous cost, you run the chance that you may lose the case, meaning a violent criminal gets off scot free. The existence of the death penalty gives prosecutors much more flexibility and power to ensure just punishments.
Debate Round No. 1
Krios_12

Con

The death penalty may give more closure to the family who have lost someone due to a murder... However, it is not going to bring back their loved one. A life sentence is much better then the death penalty, because the death penalty is allowing the States to have control over the life of someone. Retribution is in fact revenge, the simple fact of sentencing someone to the death penalty is revenge for their supposed crime. The State is never 100% sure if that was the person who committed the crime unless it was caught on video surveillance, even so, the death penalty is not going to stop others outside the court to continue their crimes.
itsteetime

Pro

itsteetime forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Krios_12

Con

Krios_12 forfeited this round.
itsteetime

Pro

itsteetime forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Krios_12

Con

Krios_12 forfeited this round.
itsteetime

Pro

itsteetime forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Krios_12

Con

Krios_12 forfeited this round.
itsteetime

Pro

itsteetime forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.