Death penalty legalized in all states
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
ConservativePolitico
| Started: | 7/11/2012 | Category: | Miscellaneous |
| Updated: | 10 months ago | Status: | Post Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 534 times | Debate No: | 24682 |
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)
|
The death penalty should be legal in all states across the United States considering some people commit crimes knowing they will get away with it. If the death penalty was implemented, those murderers might reconsider before committing the act.
"If the death penalty was implemented, those murderers might reconsider before committing the act." [sic] Unfortunately, those who commit violent crimes do not have the capacity to see the consequences of their actions in most cases. Implementing the death penalty would not be able to prevent heat of the moment murders, manslaughter or even some premeditated crimes. Only a few cases of First Degree murder might, might, be prevented under this plan. Unfortunately such speculation isn't strong enough to justify imposing this on all the states. State Sovereignty States in the United States of America have a right to implement certain policies on their own free from federal control. The death penalty is one of these policies. You cannot justify infringing on state sovereignty in order to impose the death penalty on all 50. People have a right to choose what kind of state government they want to run. You can't justify this breach of states rights on the words "murderers might reconsider". It's not strong enough evidence. Therefore, the death penalty should be left as a decision for each individual state to decide on. |
![]() |
|
As stated in an article "A Case for the Death Penalty" the murder rates raised when capital punishment was declared unconstitutional. This is a prime example of murders rates rising when there is no punishment.
As stated in the article… When executions went down, the number of murders went up.� Looking at the data from 1950-2002, the murder rate went from 4.6 per 100,000 population in 1951 to 10.2 per 100,000 population in 1980, as executions went to zero during the period the Supreme Court declared capital punishment unconstitutional.� Execution resumed in 1977.� As you can see, the murder rate once again declined. While the evidence you provided is compelling if defending the Death Penality in general you are forgetting that you must be proving why it should be legalized in all 50 states. 10th Amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. [1] If you care more about people's safety than their freedom then you should turn the country into a police state. I'm sure you agree with that logic. You must give the people the right to choose their own justice system within their states. If a state does not want the death penalty then they should not have that forced upon them. The 10th Amendment to the US Constitution gives the states rights to delegate any power not specifically laid out in the Constitution. The death penalty, not being in the Consitution, is one of these powers left to the states to delegate. What you're proposing is in violation of the Constitution. You have made a case of the death penalty, great. Now you must show why these numbers justify throwing out the Consitution, states rights and personal sovereignty within the states because right now I see no reason to defy the Constitution. [1] http://caselaw.lp.findlaw...; |
![]() |
|
Lauren.Waggoner forfeited this round.
|
![]() |
|
Lauren.Waggoner forfeited this round.
|
![]() |
|
Lauren.Waggoner forfeited this round.
|
![]() |
Post a Comment
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 10 months ago
| Lauren.Waggoner | ConservativePolitico | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | ![]() | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | ![]() | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Chelicerae 10 months ago
| Lauren.Waggoner | ConservativePolitico | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | ![]() | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 4 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not satisfy BoP because she did not defend her arguments. Since Con's arguments stand, he gets points for that. Also, because of forfeits, he gets an extra point as well.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 10 months ago
| Lauren.Waggoner | ConservativePolitico | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | ![]() | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 4 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't respond to Con's R2. Conduct for FF.











