The Instigator
lewis25
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
Anjou
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Should capital punishments be allowed in nations?

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...
lewis25
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/30/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 488 times Debate No: 80354
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

lewis25

Con

Dear debate.org users and fellow debater, me on the opposition side firmly believe that capital punishments shouldn' t be allowed in nations.

Before I start my main point, I'd like to define the word 'capital punishment'
capital punishment is one of the methods to punish murderers, criminals, illegal civic group participants, etc. This capital punishment is the way to kill(eliminate) these people to stop them from having a crime again.

First, criminals have the human rights. Also, capital punishment violates this criminal's human rights. Governments' permission is to protect all citizens from danger. But are killing murderers are the way to protect citizens? When governments kill murderers, they are actually failing to protect murderers who are one of the citizens. Also in Korea's law, it says that to "Never kill people in any reason." By the government killing the murderer, themselves are breaking the law of the country. Because of the reason of human right issues many nations banned capital punishments. According to amnesty international, 141 countries arund the world banned capital punishment.
Anjou

Pro

I accept your challenge for debate. I will be arguing not for the universal application of the death penalty in every nation, but the right for nations to allow the death penalty in their country. To the specific question "Should capital punishments be allowed in nations?" I answer in favor because I see it as the contrary stating that no nation should be allowed to have a capital punishment system.
Debate Round No. 1
lewis25

Con

Dear Pro speaker, can you post the first evidence for your claim 'Capital punishments should be allowed in naions.'? Well, let me introduce my second point.

Second, it does not reduce crime. There is no guarantee that we could reduce the crime rates, and also even in data, they failed. Others could say that if we eliminate the dangerous people of society, we could make our society safer. However, his is absolutely not true. According to U.S. government statistics, states that have capital punishments have 32% higher crime rate than the states that doesn't have capital punishments. It is because it makes more people to blame the government. Numbers indicate that capital punishment is not the way to reduce crime rates.
Anjou

Pro

Anjou forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
lewis25

Con

Proposition speaker, I feel some sorriness for not respecting the time difference of Earth. I hope you not forfeit in Round 3, and I'd like to start my third argument of the debate.

Lastly, minor mistakes could take away innocent person's life. Have you imagined, you were walking down the street, and suddenly the police comes out and says you killed 100 people and you need to get death penalty to pay your accrime. It's unfair. When we mistakenly imprison innocent people, we could free them again. But, death penalties couldn't because they had already been dead. For exmaple, Leo Gibson convicted murder in 1980, and executed in 1995. However, ten years later DNA evidence proved him innocence.

I hope you don't forfeit in this round.
Anjou

Pro

Anjou forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
lewis25

Con

I believed that Anjou would not forfeit in this round, so I said 'Lastly' on Round 3. Well, I prepared the fourth argument to be prepared of this situation. (Please don't forfeit in Round 4 and Round 5, Anjou)

Fourthly, death penalty has high costs than permanent incaraceration. Opponents may argue that it depends on how long the criminal lives. Also it has costs for their clothes, foods, etc. They could argue that it is more costly than death penalty. But however, complicated equipments to kill people, and foods, and clothes. What would be more expensive? Of course, complicated equipments that kill people are much more expensive. Datas indicate and prove this logic. According to
deathpenalty.org(http://deathpenalty.org...), California could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment. Also, California taxpayers pay $90,000 more per death row prisoner each year than on prisoners in regular confinement. Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system to be $137 million per year.

Would it be necessary to kill prisoners even if it's costly than permanent incarceration? I firmly believe that this answer is NO.
Anjou

Pro

Anjou forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
lewis25

Con

Well, because it is the last round of the debate. I'd like to finally organize my points.
Capital punishments is one of the methods to punish criminals. The capital punishment is to eliminate(kill) these people to stop them from commiting the same crime again.
My argument was
First, criminals have the human rights.
-Amnesty International-141 countries ban capital punishments.
-Korean Law 'Never kill people in any reason.'
Second, it is not helping for reducing crime.
-U.S. government statistics, capital punishment state 32% higher crime rate than states that doesn't have capital punishments.
Third, minor mistakes could take away innocent people.
-Leo Gibson
convicted murder in 1980, executed in 1995
->DNA evidence proves him innocent
Lastly,
-California save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty.

Thank you.
Anjou

Pro

Anjou forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Josh_debate 1 year ago
Josh_debate
I thing that we should get rid of capital punishment, mainly because its more expensive.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
lewis25AnjouTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
lewis25AnjouTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture