The Instigator
dward
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kdub
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Resolved: Capital Punishment shouldn't be legalized

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 3 votes the winner is...
Kdub
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,109 times Debate No: 26635
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

dward

Pro

Overview:

R1: Acceptance
R2: Definition of Key Terms, Presentation of Arguments
R3: Rebuttals
R4: Counter-Rebuttals
R5: Closing

Rules:
1.) No profanity
2.) No vulgarity
3.) No semantics
4.) No trolling
5.) No new arguments in R5
6.) Legitimate Sources are required

I wish the best to whomever accepts the debate.
Kdub

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
dward

Pro

I thank Kdub for accepting to negate the above topic.

Definition of Key Terms:

1.) Capital Punishment - the punishment of a death for a crime; death penalty [1]
2.) Crime - an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited. [2]

Degrees of Crime:
While most countries has their own different 'criteria' for a level/seriousness of a crime, let us both agree on the greatest or worst possible crime that is requires a 'death penalty' on countries legalizing the subject.

Ok, let us head on to my arguments.




RIGHT TO LIFE

Everyone of us, in any country, has the right to live. A right that protects anyone who is being abused physically,mentally and emotionally. For the people who were sentenced to 'death penalty", can this 'right' still be applied? The answer is a resoundig, yes. Irregardless of what the person did, he/she should be no excuse of this 'right'.


Flaws of the Court Trials

Sometimes, decisions made in court trials can be false. False, in way that unwanted data,unseen, is going with the flow of the court trial process thus resulting to bitter end. The decisionof the presiding judge is most of the time if not 'aways' final. Imagine a very innocent victim, executed for a crime he solely did not do. A crime that was set up.


Immediate termination of Punishment

'Say, the court trials went in an orderly good outcome. The person then was sentenced for 'death penalty' and most penalties are by way of euthansia then boom! the person, is dead. He can't even feel any suffering other than the needle of the injection. Then, he would die in peace as simple as that. In my case, I think his/her punishment must be made longer. Make the person feel waking up in a rotten and smelly cell. Inmates always picking up on him/her. Food, that isn't even worthy called 'food'. The labour in cleaning the offices,cells,bathrooms etc. Imagine if this were in 'life sentence' Harsh but better, is it not?


Increase in Murder Rate


"Statistics show that the death penalty leads to a brutalisation of society and an increase in murder rate. In the USA, more murders take place in states where capital punishment is allowed. In 2010, the murder rate in states where the death penalty has been abolished was 4.01 per cent per 100,000 people. In states where the death penalty is used, the figure was 5.00 per cent. These calculations are based on figures from the FBI. The gap between death penalty states and non-death penalty states rose considerably from 4 per cent difference in 1990 to 25 per cent in 2010."[3]


Chance to Reform


For those sentenced for 'death penalty' they can never have the chance to 'change'. Atleast, if they were sentenced to 20-40 yrs in prison or even life sentence, they might change for the better. Reflecting on the crimes they had done, meditating and etc. This gives the person to rewrite the contents inside his book.



Sources:

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...

[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...

[3] http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...




I await your arguments. =)













Kdub

Con

I would like to thank dward for starting this debate.

I agree with the definitions, but I would just like to clarify that capital punishment is "punishment by death for a crime."

I also agree that for the purpose of the debate it is best if we assume the penalty is for the most grievous of offenses.

I would first like to start by looking at the purpose of punishment. In society laws exist to maintain order otherwise there would be chaos. Laws must be enforced or they would not be obeyed and again there would be chaos. When laws are broken there must be punishment to a. to show the rest of society that laws must be obeyed and b. to ensure that there is justice, because justice is a fundamental value vital to a civizlized society.

The very basic idea of justice is to be fair, or as Aristotle defined it, justice is "giving each their due." [1] When someone does good they are due a reward, and when someone does bad they are due punishment.

It is important that the punishment match the crime. If the penalty for running a red light was only $1, there would be a lack of respect for the law requiring drivers to stop at a red light. This does not mean everyone would start running red lights. Some would not feel safe and would probably still stop at red lights. But I think it is fair to say that there would be an increase in drivers that run red lights, and in turn an increase in car accidents. On the other hand, if the penalty for running a red light was 5 years in prison, there would probably be a large decrease in the number of drivers who ran red lights. However, that punishment would be excessive, which means it is unjust, and therefore would undermine the purpose of the punishment. Because a punishment should uphold justice.

I will now explain why capital punishment is a fitting punishment for the most extreme crimes. As agreed upon earlier in this debate we will assume the penalty is for only the most serious of offenders. Essentially it is for those who have committed extreme violent acts in which another human's life is taken. In these cases the only punishment that fits the crime is capital punishment. The reason it is called capital punishment is because it is considered the chief, or most severe punishment one can receive. Thus it is fitting that it be used for those who have committed the most severe crimes. Let us look at it as if it is an equation that we are trying to balance, because, again, the purpose of justice is giving each their due. Going back to my previous example a $1 fine is not equal to running a red light. In the same way locking someone up is not equal to them committing heinous acts of murder. If it were an equation it would be an imbalance, 1 life =/= 0 life. For the penalty to be just when such an act is committed, capital punishment is the only fitting penalty.

Not using capital punishment in such cases is an injustice to the lives of the victims. It devalues and shows disregard for their lives when the perpetrator is not punished in a just manner. If capital punishment is done away with for an entire society, it degrades the value of life for that entire society. When the penalty for murder is lessened in degree, it shows a decrease in the value of human life.

These are the basic reasons for which I argue that capital punishment ought to be a legal and accpeted form of retribution.

Per my opponents request I will not discuss his arguments until the next round.

Sources:
1. http://plato.stanford.edu...

Debate Round No. 2
dward

Pro

dward forfeited this round.
Kdub

Con

Most unfortunately my opponent has forfeited. But perhaps we can continue this in the fourth and fifth rounds?
Debate Round No. 3
dward

Pro

dward forfeited this round.
Kdub

Con

Well perhaps not. Vote Con please.
Debate Round No. 4
dward

Pro

I humbly ask for my opponent's apology and the reader's as well for my failure to state rebuttals as expected on R3 and my forfeit in R4. I have been extremely busy over the weekend and on the first days of the week. If not for these, I could have made sure to override his arguments. I look forward to debate with him again regarding the resolution in the near future. I think it is too late to get back on track, with this, I hereby concede.
Kdub

Con

I certainly understand being busy, and I thank my opponent for his apology. I look forward to debating this again in the future.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Koopin 4 years ago
Koopin
dwardKdubTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Clash 4 years ago
Clash
dwardKdubTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 4 years ago
Ron-Paul
dwardKdubTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.