The Instigator
Ismagulova
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Nurgul
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should the death penalty be legal?

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...
Ismagulova
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 431 times Debate No: 38261
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Ismagulova

Pro

As we all know nowadays capital punishment is prohibited in many countries. But is it right decision? It is evidence that NO. Let me proof that capital punishment should be legal for some cruel crimes, like pedophilia or too cruel killing of human being.
Nurgul

Con

'too cruel killing of human being'
Killing is killing, regardless of the method. All that matters is that they did it and the cause for it. It's not the eighteenth century; people don't duel with each other over honour anymore. If I stab someone and leave them to die, how is that worse than shooting them with a sniper rifle clean through the head? It's not, really. All that matters are the circumstances, such as a robbery gone wrong, a fit of passion or a mental illness.
Debate Round No. 1
Ismagulova

Pro

"Killing is killing, regardless of the method"
However, some people do not do it on a purpose. They just become victims of circumstances. For example, let`s imaging that someone is hunting, and shoot thinking that it is an animal. But only then he recognizes that it is a human. There are also people who do it in order to defend themselves and so on. While other people do this consciously. And sometimes it seems to be like they enjoy with killing someone and mocking them. Not to speak of pedophilia. And do not you afraid of living in such society with beasts like these? And do not you afraid of that your child or other close people may be the next victim of these "mentally ill" people. Because it has big possibility while these beasts are alive.
Nurgul

Con

So you admit that most people who commit pedophilia and murder are mentally ill, yet still believe that killing them is the best option. That's just barbarism. If they are mentally ill, it is not their fault that they commit crimes. But you would punish them.
Pedophilia is a mental disorder. It has a huge amount of possible and probable causes, and should be and is considered in most parts of the post-enlightenment world to be an illness. A person that conducts themselves in any mentally ill manner should have the right to help from the government to allow them to control and eventually eradicate the behavior.
Debate Round No. 2
Ismagulova

Pro

Thank you for saying your point of view.
"it is not their fault that they commit crimes"
It is not also fault of children who become victims and have psychological traumas and emotional problems for all life. Real barbarism is giving them one more chance to do such kind of things.
"help from the government"
First of all, not government pays for them. Where do you thing government takes money for prisoners? They take it from us " populace. And can you imagine how much does it cost to provide one prisoner who was adjudged for life imprisonment with drink, food and other accommodation.
Secondly, if they punished just as treatment in mental health asylum, how can doctors be sure that a patient is totally cured. Because mentally ill is different from other ones. You may never be sure that ill person after course of treatment will not do the crimes again. So we give them one more chance to kill someone else again ourselves.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Jonathan11 3 years ago
Jonathan11
IsmagulovaNurgulTied
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: Con did not argue against the proposition, overall this was a poor debate on both sides (P.S I f you "accidentally" kill some one that would be considered man slaughter.)
Vote Placed by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
IsmagulovaNurgulTied
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: Conduct: Neither side misbehaved. S&G: Spelling was even. Sources: There were none. Arguments: Neither side did good. I felt Con misunderstands the definition of murder, confusing Murder and Homicide. Pro put forth a little more of an argument. Either way, both have a long way to go.