The Instigator
MasturDeBator2009
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Zetsubou
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Execution Should Be By Feeding People To Lions And Other Zoo Animals

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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/19/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,327 times Debate No: 11474
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (3)

 

MasturDeBator2009

Pro

Executions have become very, very expensive thanks to needing to pay for equipment and chemicals and due to the lengthy appeals process. Feeding someone to a lion would be quick and easy. Just take them to a zoo, toss them in, and let the lion eat them.

We could then film it on tv and on that day the zoo could charge a huge price for admission, of which the government would get some and the zoo would get some, both making out with more money than before.

There are even more opportunities for money-making. You could have reality tv shows about death row. You could do that now, but it would be even more interesting if the inmates were afraid of being eaten by lions. You could even allow the inmate to hire a trainer to help them beat the lion. If they defeat the lion they will still be fed to another lion and have to pay the zoo to replace the lion if the lion dies, but will get to live at least another month. That could be an entertaining run of shows. Inmate defeats one lion, then suspense builds until the next round one month later. Will the inmate live? Bets could be taken on it, with everyone who loses having their money go to the state.

In the end the state could wind up making money off of the execution, not just the execution but coming out ahead even after considering court costs and incarceration.

Other zoo animals like tigers bears sharks or anacondas could also be used. They could even make the animal an inmate faces each month a surprise to add more suspense and create another gambling opportunity for the state to make money (gambling on what animal the inmate will face).

To guarantee execution happens at some point and the inmate doesnt just keep surviving it should be made harder over time. So if the inmate is still alive after 6 execution attempts the inmate should be thrown in with his feet tied together. If he manages to live 2 more times then he gets handcuffed. If he still lives for 3 more times he is tied spread eagle to a rock and cut so the animal smells him and eats him. If he still lives after that he is thrown tied up in a guaranteed aquatic environment to be eaten by a shark, whale, or giant squid. No way would he survive that. Even if the animal didn't eat him he'd drown.
Zetsubou

Con

I think common sense will tell you the failure of Lion Executions,

But just in case here it goes.

The Purpose of Execution: The Purpose of Execution is to kill someone who is a threat to the nature of Mankind if kept alive; where imprisonment and freedom of thought is a risk. No matter how much of a Sociopath the Prisoner is, you have to have to treat them as human in the most humane way possible regardless of money or "fun".

>>The Inhumanity of feeding people to a Lion
Feeding someone to a Lion is long and painful method. A Solitary lion tends to eat his/her prey while it is dying. The Man you see will be eaten while you will hear his Scream. There are more Human methods and cheaper methods available.

[H] = Humane, [C] = Cheaper

-Long Drop [H] [C]
-Poison [H] [C]*
-Guillotine [H] [C]
-Suffocation [H] [C]
-Firing Squad [H] [C]
-Burning [H]
-Electrocution [H]

Almost all methods are more humane. Maintaining a Loin cost s good amount of money.

*Alcohol Poisoning, Hydrogen Cyanide or Carbon Monoxide are all relatively cheap.

>>The Impracticality of Public Violence [1]
Live Killing of a Person is illegal. It supposedly creates Violence. Imagine People watching a man get mauled Screaming with his intestines being ripped out. (Three Men, one Hammer) This is a Sadist fest, and Sadism is a legal Psychological deviant. Just watching this could potentially cause.

-Sadism
-Sadism Leading to Criminal Murder
-Masochism
-Post Traumatic Stress disorder
-Violent Tendencies
- Dysthymia
-Anxiety and Phobia
-Personality Disorders(A-Cs)
Ect. [ICD-9, 290-319: mental disorders]

>>Creation of Killer Lions
--Lions rarely ever attack(or Kill) humans for prey[2.5]. Most Lion attacks are caused when people surprise them, threaten them or when common food is scarce. Fewer than 100 people die each year by Lion attacks internationally [2].

Feeding people to lions will get them used to eating human meat and hunting them you are creating/breeding a predator to our race. When a animal hunts and eats another animal it will see it as prey they will see us and a common prey contrary to the current last resort as they see us now. A Lion could easily kill an unarmed human. Just imagine an breakout situation in a large City(Public Executions) fatal and avoidable.

~ [3]~

--Money Contention
Morally: Money isn't worth a human life no matter how "worthless" they appear. You avoid economic gain to a human life if you can help it.

----
Your turn Sir.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org... // [1.5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://chronicle.uchicago.edu...
[3] http://hubpages.com...
Debate Round No. 1
MasturDeBator2009

Pro

"The Purpose of Execution: The Purpose of Execution is to kill someone who is a threat to the nature of Mankind if kept alive; where imprisonment and freedom of thought is a risk. No matter how much of a Sociopath the Prisoner is, you have to have to treat them as human in the most humane way possible regardless of money or "fun"."
I agree. But my proposal is really the most humane way to run executions.

">>The Inhumanity of feeding people to a Lion
Feeding someone to a Lion is long and painful method. A Solitary lion tends to eat his/her prey while it is dying. The Man you see will be eaten while you will hear his Scream. There are more Human methods and cheaper methods available."
Imprisonment itself is highly inhumane, especially because the prison environment tends to promote rape. Regardless every day spent in prison is a day spent suffering. Putting the prisoner down is more humane than letting them rot in prison, and at the same time gives victims' families closure, sends a strong social statement against the crime, and although the prisoner is being treated better by being executed is psychologically scary to onlookers making a possible deterrent effect that may save innocent lives.
Execution by lion would seem more inhumane on the surface but it is not if you really think about it. Execution by lion or other zoo animal is the only way to really make an interesting enough execution for wide public attention over the tv. Lethal injection is boring. Nobody wants to watch that. But seeing a human get torn and eaten by animals would be highly entertaining. This could generate a lot of fanfare, maybe more than American Idol. Convicts would get to be famous. Some would even survive and vanquish the animal a few times before finally being executed, so the convicts would get to have some fun with this competing with the others to see who can last the longest. The joy they would get out of this would compensate for the pain they would feel when they get eaten. As it is once they die any suffering they had before will end. Their suffering will be over. If pain could be measured the amount of pain a person feels added up serving life in prison would still be far greater than the amount of pain felt being executed by being fed to animals.

"Maintaining a Loin cost s good amount of money."
There are plenty of zoos and aquariums that already maintain animals. There is no need for the state to maintain animals separately for the purpose of executions. So this wouldn't cost anything extra.

">>The Impracticality of Public Violence [1]
Live Killing of a Person is illegal."
Not if we pass a law saying its legal.
"It supposedly creates Violence. Imagine People watching a man get mauled Screaming with his intestines being ripped out. (Three Men, one Hammer) This is a Sadist fest, and Sadism is a legal Psychological deviant. Just watching this could potentially cause.

-Sadism
-Sadism Leading to Criminal Murder
-Masochism
-Post Traumatic Stress disorder
-Violent Tendencies
- Dysthymia
-Anxiety and Phobia
-Personality Disorders(A-Cs)
Ect. [ICD-9, 290-319: mental disorders]"
This is unfounded. Watching violence no matter how gratuitous does not lead a person to become violent. A new study shows that violent video games don't cause violence.
http://www.switched.com...
Violent video games often have violence that is senseless and kills innocents in the storyline but studies still shows violent video games do not lead to people acting out violence. Execution on the other hand has a clear purpose of punishing murder and sending a social message against it, so if violent video games don't increase the risk of violence neither will public executions.
PS what is "legal psychological deviant"?

">>Creation of Killer Lions
--Lions rarely ever attack(or Kill) humans for prey[2.5]. Most Lion attacks are caused when people surprise them, threaten them or when common food is scarce. Fewer than 100 people die each year by Lion attacks internationally [2].

Feeding people to lions will get them used to eating human meat and hunting them you are creating/breeding a predator to our race. When a animal hunts and eats another animal it will see it as prey they will see us and a common prey contrary to the current last resort as they see us now. A Lion could easily kill an unarmed human. Just imagine an breakout situation in a large City(Public Executions) fatal and avoidable."
If a dangerous lion escapes then they can tranquilize or kill the animal to stop it. Measures are already in place for this risk.

"--Money Contention
Morally: Money isn't worth a human life no matter how "worthless" they appear. You avoid economic gain to a human life if you can help it."

They forfeited their lives when they murdered someone. Killing them in this manner might actually save lives. Imagine seeing images of people getting torn apart by animals every day and knowing that those people were getting torn apart by animals because they murdered somebody. That would make you think twice wouldn't it? This would likely get a lot of fanfare so there might even be some close call situations where a person who would've otherwise committed murder is suddenly reminded of the scene on tv. Imagine a man in a bar sees his girlfriend making out with another man and gets mad, he reaches for a knife but then overhears people talking about the recent episode of "Execution" and how gory it was. Suddenly the image he just saw on tv flashes in his mind. He shudders, puts his knife away and instead settles for yelling at the man and telling his girlfriend it's over.
Zetsubou

Con

>>>Intro and Information:<<<-
---------------------------------------
Thank you for that argument...
I would like to commend Pro for quoting my arguments to fill his charcter count.

P.S. Legal psychological deviant – Legally accepted Psychological mess up.

>> "I agree. But my proposal is really the most humane way to run executions."

Justify. Malling a man to death is a humane way to run a execution?

When being attacked by a lion you skill being ripped before you die.[1] Not to mention broken bones[1] depending on where the lion bites and you, not to mention the fact your not 100% guaranteed to die within the first few seconds of attack. You don't get this with lethal injection or any other method I've given.[See round I]

">>The Impracticality of Public Violence
Ok, watching a man get malled by a Lion is very, very different to a video game. Even the most Violent Videogames aren't so real, after all it's graphic violence.

One of most Violent games in the world banned or cut in most countries man hunt is Gory, cutting men with chainsaws, murder with no mercy. [see comments or youtube.com/watch?v=QMVrSLJN0vQ] You are seeing real people with full histories, families, friends with love and feelings, people with personalities, contrary to games where you kill a random pixeled human like thing you know nothing about. This is different, hearing a fellow humans screams and cries? Is it worth it? Morality disagrees.

>>RE: The Inhumanity of feeding people to a Lion

"Imprisonment itself is highly inhumane, especially because the prison environment tends to promote rape."

Low Possibility of Rape vs a painful death? Hardly Equal.

"Regardless every day spent in prison is a day spent suffering. Putting the prisoner down is more humane than letting them rot in prison, and at the same time gives victims' families closure, sends a strong social statement against the crime, and although the prisoner is being treated better by being executed is psychologically scary to onlookers making a possible deterrent effect that may save innocent lives."

There are other methods of killing them[Round I]. And The very fact you will kill the person is good enough a deterrent anyway.

"Execution by lion would seem more inhumane on the surface but it is not if you really think about it. Execution by lion or other zoo animal is the only way to really make an interesting enough execution for wide public attention over the tv. Lethal injection is boring. Nobody wants to watch that. But seeing a human get torn and eaten by animals would be highly entertaining. This could generate a lot of fanfare, maybe more than American Idol. Convicts would get to be famous. Some would even survive and vanquish the animal a few times before finally being executed, so the convicts would get to have some fun with this competing with the others to see who can last the longest. "

Death is not funny or entertaining no matter how much of a Sociopath the murderer is. As I said: "The Purpose of Execution: The Purpose of Execution is to kill someone who is a threat to the nature of Mankind if kept alive; where imprisonment and freedom of thought is a risk. No matter how much of a Sociopath the Prisoner is, you have to have to treat them as human in the most humane way possible regardless of money or "fun"." You agreed, remember?

The joy they would get out of this would compensate for the pain they would feel when they get eaten. As it is once they die any suffering they had before will end. Their suffering will be over. If pain could be measured the amount of pain a person feels added up serving life in prison would still be far greater than the amount of pain felt being executed by being fed to animals.

As I said there are more human ways of killing them if life imprisonment totals to such pain, and giving them a sick trill to fight makes you as bad the criminal.

>>Creation of Killer Lions
Why create a Danger to yourself anyway?

>> Of Money and the tale of the man and his girlfriend.
This contention has nothing to do with my money argument but anyway. As for the comedic story of the man and his girlfriend, murder of anger is not punishable by death. Life Imprisonment is for crimes against humanity. Common murder is a 20 year life sentence.[2]

[1] You try getting attacked by a lion. Really, try it. If not: http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]US- http://en.wikipedia.org...(United_States_law)
UK- http://www.austlii.edu.au...

Gratias tibi ago and Good Luck, Sir.
Debate Round No. 2
MasturDeBator2009

Pro

MasturDeBator2009 forfeited this round.
Zetsubou

Con

I really don't have much more to say. Extend Arguments.

My apologies go to Pro who couldn't post in time due to the >10 second Argument postage time lag.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by grahamreiver 6 years ago
grahamreiver
i'm voting for MasturDeBator2009 for president/dictator...
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Yeah, that happened once, it was first round though so I got lucky. LAWL
Posted by MasturDeBator2009 6 years ago
MasturDeBator2009
I am so f---ing pissed! I had one f---ing second left! I was in the process of posting it and this shithole computer just broke down!

Maybe I would've gotten it posted if everyone in this room I'm sitting in would just SHUT UP!
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
For Argument:
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
You quoted my argument to make yours look bigger.

Cheap move.
Posted by Puck 6 years ago
Puck
That's no fun, Zetsubou. Human hunters scheme would raise far more money. :D
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
Compared to others yeah.

I'll give you citation R2.
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
'Maintaining a Loin costs good amount of money'

Really?
Posted by Zetsubou 6 years ago
Zetsubou
I will but, ...

I don't know why I took it.
Posted by Immortal 6 years ago
Immortal
If Zetsubou does not debate this, MasturDeBator29, then I want to debate, okay?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
MasturDeBator2009ZetsubouTied
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 I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
MasturDeBator2009ZetsubouTied
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 philosphical 6 years ago
philosphical
MasturDeBator2009ZetsubouTied
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