The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should the Death Penalty Be Kept

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
india4thewin has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 818 times Debate No: 99798
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




The death penalty is a vital part of American justice. Without it, more people would commit horrific crimes because they no longer fear death. One would obviously prefer a life, no matter how horrid, compared to death.


"The death penalty is a vital part of American justice."

Pro argues that the death penalty is a vital part of american justice, whilst in the realities of various other governments there can be more proposals toward different approaches, therefore it is NOT the only vital portion of american justice, whilst regarding the death penalty it should not be sustainable.

The death penalty should not be kept, there can be various other methods of sustaining criminals in their current sentence periods. Alternatives can help contribute to less death and in fact, less torture. Not to mention of the racial discrimination involved in criminal participation towards misdeeds such as stealing, raping, murder, etc. Such as the case regarding juvenile delinquents whom had also been given death penalty less likely than adult criminals. This is immoral and unjustified children who committed crimes should NOT be given death penalty instead they should be given the liberty of doing workforce of perhaps a harsher punishment. [1]

Primarily, it is considered that the death penalty has been overused for the past century and thus is consistent and impractical. The death penalty does NOT save lives, in fact it merely increases the homicide rates which swell up in prison facilities. [2] It is arbitrary to assume that the death penalty should be kept, and it is comprehensible as to why it should for the sole reason of the highest punishment unimaginable defined by the system of the U.S. government.

"Without it, more people would commit horrific crimes because they no longer fear death."

With the death penalty, prisoners can STILL fear death, we cannot assume that a prisoner's state of mind is truly sane nor insane. Yes, people can commit a large number of horrific crimes but given the death penalty. It can be overused. The supreme court has ruled the death penalty to be unconstitutional and thus most government officials have done nothing to recognize it.[3] This exemplifies that not only can prisoner's be given the opportunity of liberty through the sake of the free peoples but it can serve as a reminder to help realize that the death penalty is immoral and thus unjustified.[3]

Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by DivineMorality 1 year ago
As much as I'm happy to see that people are aware of this epidemic and are currently spreading their opinions, however I am concerned if Pro will continue with this debate otherwise it will be pointless, seeing as she/he hasn't replied.
Posted by prankster05 1 year ago
we all must agree that death penalty is never given on petty issues like theft, extortion, misappropriation, forgery etc,. rather it is always given on a very horrendous crimes in the human society. and that crimes completely spoil the life of an individual. just think for a while that those person should be spared ? just think would you spare a murderer who has killed a boy or a girl of just 14 years, just think would you spare a man who has completely destroyed the life of a girl,, once again just think that a man killed a man of age 37 years who is a father of 3 children of age 12, 10 and 6 respectively, who is the only source of income for them. we all should think what harm that person gave to the society and specially the victims.
Posted by FanboyMctroll 1 year ago
Why does the murderer, the serial killer or whatever sick freak who is accused of murder be given any special treatment. Did he ponder whether he should kill the victim?

I'm all for the death penalty, but for an added bonus they should execute the person the same way he killed the victim. If he shot and killed someone, shoot him to death, if he stabbed someone 38 times, then he should be stabbed 38 times. If he tortured someone, torture him.

Why should I feel any remorse for a killer? Off with his head
Posted by canis 1 year ago
Death penalty makes you a murderer..But that can be ok..
Posted by John_C_1812 1 year ago
The basic principle behind the death penalty is Constitutionally called Capital punishment. Death penalty is a definition introduced by lawyers and it is relating to the justice system which operates inside the Judicial Separation. A lawyer is licensed to describe justice in many ways none of which are impartial. That is why they are screened by a State licensing process.

The average voter has a Constitutional right which prohibits the use of Death penalty in the open public. As it is a well worded accusation which can be describe in a natural fashion. Capital Punishment meaning the highest form of separation which can be conducted by an impartial system.
Posted by NeuralNetwork 1 year ago
I'd take death over a life only of horrid torture.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.