The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Should the death penalty be illegal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/20/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,181 times Debate No: 63590
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




I believe that the death penalty should be illegal in ALL states (and the world for that matter) due to the fact that there is no crime that should be punishable by death. For example, if there is a murder (i.e. Jodi Arias), and the defendant is found guilty, the government has no right to kill him/her due to the fact that this too is murder.


The death penalty is although a very cruel punishment it is still a very needed thing. the death penalty is taking out someone in the world who has done much wrong. you make it sound like the death penalty is thrown around like it is nothing but in reality it is only given in the most serious of cases. For example Richard Ramirez, he was responsible for over 13 men and woman's deaths on the night of June 28th 1984. You wouldn't just want him sitting in a prison getting fed and being able to lift weights and do what he wants.
Debate Round No. 1


"the death penalty is taking out someone in the world who has done much wrong."

My opponent is implying that life imprisonment is not "taking out" the committer of a heinous crime. If there is a violent murder, it is usually done in a rage. When in a rage, the human brain is simplified down to the thought process of, "This person has made me angry, so I will end their life.". However, a jury does NOT have that thought process. The defendant is being punished because of a murder, which is perfectly legal to indirectly cause by saying a defendant is guilty in some states.

The justice systems of the states that have not ruled out the death penalty are riddled with hypocrisy. An example is Texas, one of the most patriotic states of the country, who speaks out against the killing of colonists in the revolutionary war period for defying the government, yet they are VERY supportive of the death penalty, which is also for defying the government's laws.

In conclusion, the death penalty is basically also simplifying the LAW into "This person did something wrong, let's kill them.". This, in today's society, is unacceptable and unnecessary due to the fact that the defendants of crimes could be kept from attempting them again in solitary confinement.


Yes I understand your points but even though you may think the death penalty is saying this person did something wrong, lets kill them. That's not what it means. When a person is being charged for murder they most likely aren't goanna get the death penalty but when the person kills many many people they obviously are going to give the person the death penalty. This is punishment is a very serious and is only subdued when it is VERY needed. Once again it is not tossed around like something as simple as putting someone in jail. When you said the justice systems that have not ruled it out are hypocrites when in reality they are not because when someone murders someone or say blows up a building they are doing it out of rage and haterid but when the government makes the choice to give someone the death penalty they are doing it for the good of the people and not because they hate the person
Debate Round No. 2


"This is punishment is a very serious and is only subdued when it is VERY needed."

There is where I believe you are wrong. There is never a time when a human is NEEDED dead. No one will benefit. The death penalty costs more than imprisonment, the criminal will not be able to commit any of the crimes when contained, and it definitely will not bring back anyone they have killed.

The death penalty is more of an act of revenge than anything. This is because, whether it seems needed or not, it is still a decision based on emotion. The death penalty should not be available due to a prosecutor possibly using shock appeal in a courtroom to make the jury hateful. Without the death penalty, the jury has room to be hateful but will not have the option to use that hate to make a rash decision by giving to verdict to sentence the defendant.

Also, by saying that the death penalty is needed, that is based solely on opinion. Does this mean that 9/11 is justifiable? It probably is to the people who did it. Due to their religious beliefs, they decided that Americans deserved a punishment. Is that not the death penalty on a mass scale? We, as humans, have no moral, ethical, religious, and, in most states, the LEGAL right to have someone killed because they believe against their actions.

In conclusion, we should not have the right to make the decision of the taking of someone's life. There are too many conflicting opinions, meaning someone would be killed for the wrong reason. I believe that the death penalty leaves too much to chance such as the possibility of innocence, religion conflicting their decision, etc.


There is where I believe you are wrong. There is never a time a human is NEEDED dead"

why do you think so many people were happy Osama Bin Laden was found dead? Because they didn't want the person who organized 9/11 running around free. I bet you were also one of the people who were happy that he was dead. When the army was going to look for we both know they were going to kill him right then and there but lets say they wouldn't of killed him there. They would of brought him back to the United States and given him the Death Penalty and everyone would of been just as happy.

"there are too many conflicting opinions, meaning someone would be killed for the wrong reason. I believe that the death penalty leaves too much to chance such as the possibility of innocence, religion conflicting their decision"

When a jury is thinking of giving someone the death penalty they are not just going to say "oh you backed into a poll? your sentence is the death penalty" They will never do something like that. When they sentence someone to the death penalty they would always make sure the jury knows what they are doing and do not just assume they are right. They take many weeks and look over the evidence before making a verdict.

In conclusion, I believe that the death penalty should be legal because there are many bad people in the world and some of them need to be punished with death and not just sitting in jail having a well balanced diet and exercise and free time around other bad people.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by IDebate99 9 months ago
"the death penalty is taking out someone in the world who has done much wrong"
I think God should punish whoever did something wrong in life not people.
And if you don't believe in God...
There is jail, they could lock him there forever until he/she dies.

Taking away someone's life is just cruel. Imagine you knowing that you are going to die in 1 hour, or they are taking you to the execution room, and you know you are going to die there. all the nervousness, people who have extreme nervousness remain quiet for some reason, are you imagining that feeling? so why just locking them in jail forever. We are all humans, we all should have mercy because all this world needs right now is peace.
Posted by YouSirName 2 years ago
Although the death penalty is not technically "murder" (defined by law), it is immoral. Just as it is abhorrent for an individual to kill another (apart from last resort in defense of self or other), it is equally (if not more) abhorrent to kill a prisoner because "that's what the rules say." Remember the "state" doesn't actually kill anyone. An employee of the state kills the person. It is not "OK" for that person to kill because "it's just my job." That is a terrible moral justification.
Posted by mdc32 2 years ago
Pro, you state that the government enforcing the death penalty is murder. This is false. Murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of another. The government's actions are lawful, as the death penalty is legal.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Buddahcall 2 years ago
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: I do not believe in the death penalty myself, however the Opponent in this case made a better argument in my opinion. I believe that the instigator in this case showed too much emotion and too little facts.