The Instigator
gawilson
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
Reactive
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should the Death Penalty be banned

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
gawilson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 472 times Debate No: 71164
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

gawilson

Pro

The death penalty should be banned as killing people for committing crimes makes us just as bad as the. As well as that banning it produces an economic benefit as it costs more money to have a death penalty trial and execution than it does to keep prisoners in prison for over 70 years.
Reactive

Con

The death penalty is in fact a simple, painless way to rid the world of potential mass murders, suicide bombers and other kinds of terrorists. Instead you say 'No' but the real reason I believe is that you are in fact one of 'them'. A mass murder using your last few minutes on this earth to post a stupid argument on the beautiful website. I hope you enjoy your last meal before you feel the first of the 3 fatal injections that will rid you of life.

L8er M9,
Reactive
Debate Round No. 1
gawilson

Pro

Now Now "Reactive" i am not in fact this mad man on Death Row and i am just trying to get my point across that the death penalty is not morally right and doesnt have much going for it. In California 1978 they re instated the death penalty and since then only 13 people have been executed at an expense of $4 billion of tax payers money so GET REKT bro ur not my M8 and u have a 0% chance of winning this debate u minecraft goon
Reactive

Con

Name calling and sexual references will achieve NOTHING! So I ask you is it really $4 billion of U.S funds or is the majority of that really just the defendants lawyer and other advisers and the small judge fee? So no I put to you can you handle having a muti/mass murder with known health disabilities living next to you? It would be simple to get hold of a gun in the angel country USA? So GTFO BOY!
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by atheismism 1 year ago
atheismism
OOIHHHHHHHHH H damn he brote moinecroft inna it!!!!!!!!!!

ill hav eu no i haz a lvl trillein sharpness million bestesimist diamind sword with special onehit hedshot mod installed

u getting h8y on minecroft now sun?????????????????

oi wen my peppa spray gets here in the post im gunna spray it thru my imputa inta yer fayce and hurt u

get on my level (im lvl billein so get rekt cos it takes yeatrs)
Posted by atheismism 1 year ago
atheismism
personally i believe in the age old saying
"if u tuch me ill cut u cos im more important"

by this logic i think murderers should be tortured to death as they need to be hurt more severely than murder.

On the other had i like the pros name soooo...

it shud be binned cos drugs is illegal and they use drugs to kill baddies sooo.....

imo u shud both get real lives...

huhuhuhuehueheuheuheuheuehueheuheuheuheuheuheueuheuheuehuheuheuehuehueheuheuheuhe

play CS:GO and watch pewdiepie 4 lyfe klub

huehueheuheuheuheuheuehuehueheuheuheuheuheuheuehuehuehuehe

kayleb has bad running
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by AlwaysRight12345 1 year ago
AlwaysRight12345
gawilsonReactiveTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did nothing but use ad hominem attacks. No arguments were made AT ALL. Pro used the reference of California in 1978.
Vote Placed by DomriRade4444 1 year ago
DomriRade4444
gawilsonReactiveTied
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: Grammar- was terrible all around Conduct- Personal insults. Come on! Arguments- Con provided no evidence and attempted to discredit pros only claim with a personal insult. Sources- None listed