The Instigator
mhwide327
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
musicheart126
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points

Is death penalty necessary?

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 2 votes the winner is...
mhwide327
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/12/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 997 times Debate No: 56478
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

mhwide327

Con

Death penalty isn't necessary to people because some innocent people are dead by this penalty before they prove that they aren't guilty. Also, the new studies show that death penalty violates the human rights standards.
http://www.worldcoalition.org...
musicheart126

Pro

I disagree. Nowadays there a lot of scientific ways to prove a murder. Example: DNA testing etc
And when a death penalty is issued, it takes around a year for all the evidence and reports to prove the murderer.
By killing murderers we are actually saving a lot of lives. There is always a chance that the criminal can escape prison since security systems are not 100% perfect. The criminal can also be bailed out of jail.
Debate Round No. 1
mhwide327

Con

however it isn't right to kill the criminal. It is an immoral method to use the death penalty. Also, lots of rich people escape from the death penalty and the poor people are dead because of the death penalty. How are you going to solve this problems?
musicheart126

Pro

it is important to maintain a balance. By giving the criminal a death penalty, it gives closure to the victim's family and also witnesses.
Majority of the people only look at the murderer's condition. The person murdered another human being. Why should he be allowed to live when the victim's family is suffering from the loss? Also, if the murderer is killed, it gives closure to the family and also other people in the society.
Killing a murderer is not stooping down to the murderer's level, it is only for the safety of other people and to prevent other murders.
60% of the Japan population agree with the death penalty when a survey was conducted.
Debate Round No. 2
mhwide327

Con

T]here is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates. The death penalty has no deterrent effect. Claims that each execution deters a certain number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research
musicheart126

Pro

There has been a significant decrease in crimes in Singapore, Japan and other countries after the Capital punishment law has been issued
Debate Round No. 3
mhwide327

Con

Not just the victims' family will be sad, the criminals' family or relatives can be sad too when the criminals are innocent. In addition, when the criminal is innocent and if they are dead then they are no solutions that we can reward them/.
musicheart126

Pro

The person murdered another human being. Why should he be allowed to live when the victim's family is suffering from the loss? Also, if the murderer is killed, it gives closure to the family and also other people in the society.
Killing a murderer is not stooping down to the murderer's level, it is only for the safety of other people and to prevent other murders.
it takes around a year for all the evidence and reports to prove the murderer. It is very rare that the criminal is proved innocent
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by OnlyGodCanJudgeMe 2 years ago
OnlyGodCanJudgeMe
The death penalty is not necessary because there is nothing that person can do to learn from it. Consequences are used to teach people to learn from their mistakes but if you're dead, then you're not learning anything.. Everyone should be trying to help others, not end their life.
Posted by cosecant 2 years ago
cosecant
Sorry for interruption. If you want to know more about your favourite drink, click here http://www.debate.org... Once on page scroll down to view more options & comment if you wish.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TheCoolestPersonEver 2 years ago
TheCoolestPersonEver
mhwide327musicheart126Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side used any sources, and both arguments were less than perfect. However, Con brought up the possibility of an innocent person being executed. Pro responded by saying, "And when a death penalty is issued, it takes around a year for all the evidence and reports to prove the murderer." I'm unclear on what this means and how it refutes Con's argument.
Vote Placed by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
mhwide327musicheart126Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con should have declared for what it is necessary. Words like "right" and "immoral" should not be used as arguments since they are way too subjective. Pro has't responded to Con's argument in round 2.