The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Is death penalty justified?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/19/2015 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 841 times Debate No: 78820
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I believe that Death Penalty is totally justified for reasons which I wish to share in the next round of this debate. As far as I have observed, the first round of a debate is usually an "acceptance" round.
Anyway, death penalty is something which is very important in the smooth functioning of a nation. I am really sorry but I'll be giving my arguments on this point (along with examples) only in the next round.


I would like to accept this debate, and thank Pro for his suggestion. I will be arguing against death penalty.

I am looking forward to an enriching exchange.
Debate Round No. 1


Firstly, I would like to state that death penalty is a form of punishment that gives the citizens a feeling that their security and welfare is what the government is after. I believe this because people who cause millions of others to lose their lives deserve punishment. Its not just about punishment, but even the aspect of justice for the families and the lives of the ones who die by the hands of such criminals.

Often, I have read about people discussing the fact that these people who are given the death penalty have the right to live but the idea seems an insult to those who die in terror attacks. It almost feels like the government doesn't care about the ones who die in such incidents. I believe that the death penalty is justified when given to people who have claimed the lives of others. I believe that they do not have the right to live if they decide to take up other's lives.

Also, I hate it when people tell me, "Why should we stoop to their level and commit murder?". If we do not sentence these people to death penalty, then what about justice? People also say that life imprisonment is a better option but looking at the number of cases where inmates have escaped justice, it doesn't seem so. Another aspect that comes into picture is the mindset of the people. With strict punishments like Saudi Arabia has (though I don't agree with all forms of their punishments) people who are willing to commit crimes are forced to rethink their course of action due to the strict policing. If such punishments are not given then people seem to lose their fear of law. To ensure that law is maintained, punishments have to strict and must be enforced.


My opponent begins by arguing that death penalty gives citizens the feeling that the government is caring for their security and welfare. However, he does not state why other punishment, such as prison sentences, fail to install the same feeling. Telling to the population "We will execute all murderers" and "We will put all murderers to jail" conveys in both cases the idea that the government wants murderers out of the society of law-abiding citizens.
Moreover, installing death penalty can have the exact opposite effect and create a belief that government is seeking the oppression of its population. I doubt that homosexuals in Saudi Arabia see their government as pursuing their welfare, when, in this country, same-sex intercourse is punished by death [1].

My opponent then argues that people deciding to take up other's lives do not have the right to live. This argument means that soldiers fighting for a country's peace, as well as policemen defending themselves, will also lose their right to live, should they come to kill in their line of duty. One can easily see the absurdity of such a line of thought.

While my opponent frequently uses the term "justice," he fails to define it. Quoting the Cambridge Dictionary, justice is the "fairness in the way people are dealt with." If my opponent believes that fairness consists in a murderer being murdered, he should agree likewise that rapists be raped and torturers be tortured. I sincerely doubt that people would agree with such an idea of fairness.

My opponent finally argues that capital punishment would have a preventive effect, and that would-be murderers are more likely to commit murder in a state where capital punishment doesn't exist. The National Research Council has reported that such an effect has been neither confirmed nor refuted [2], so that there is no basis for such a statement.

Let me conclude by pointing out that the main drawback of death penalty is that it doesn't allow for any mistake. No matter how good-willed it is, no justice system is perfect, and each and every one of them is bound to make errors of judgement. While it is possible to give someone back her liberty should her innocence be proven after the life sentence has been pronounced, it is not the case for death penalty. Is it right to sacrifice lives of innocent people, just to be sure that murderers do not escape justice?

Thank you.

Debate Round No. 2


To my opponent I would like to say that I am extremely impressed by your arguments. Honestly, I do not have any other points to argue against what you have just mentioned. Personally, I always felt that my line of thought in this topic was completely justified and should have been acceptable but I guess that has sort of changed. This might seem like I'm fickle minded but rest assured that you have changed my mind for good! :P Sorry to have not given you the satisfaction of a good debate! I might as well forfeit this round but its not an option as I went first! :/ I'll just have to write something really stupid in the next round also!


I thank my opponent for agreeing with my arguments and refutations. Far from me the thought that this displays fickleness, on the contrary I think it is very brave for one to admit he's changed his mind.
Debate Round No. 3


Just another post to complete this round. I forfeit.


Fair enough.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.