The Instigator
ArchonViserys
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tejretics
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Should the death penalty be reintroduced into Australia?

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 3 votes the winner is...
tejretics
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/17/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 713 times Debate No: 75412
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

ArchonViserys

Pro

The death penalty should be reintroduced as it allows for the safeguarding of society.
my reasoning for this is simple, no one who has ever been executed has gone on to commit another crime. Examples like Adrian Ernest Bayley prove this point as despite an extensive previous history of criminal activities he was allowed out of prison where he then proceed to rape and kill a young women. Even with such a history he shall be eligible for parole within the next 30 years. Imprisonment does not work and does not protect society from those who would harm those who live with in its bounds.
tejretics

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
ArchonViserys

Pro

ArchonViserys forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

I. Costs



The cost of prosecuting a capital case is far greater than that of a non-capital case. Capital cases cost governments USD 20 million more than non-capital cases. [1] According to Sherod Thaxton, the DP involves “five times more pretrial motions,” five times more investigation by the defense team, 66 times longer to select and exclude jury members, 30 days more in court, “twice as many lawyers (by statute),” and “longer and more complicated appeals.” [2] Though the overall estimates on costs might be exaggerated, they nonetheless convey the major difference. "A Seattle University study examining the costs of the death penalty in Washington found that each death penalty case cost an average of $1 million more than a similar case where the death penalty was not sought ($3.07 million, versus $2.01 million)." [3]



"[A] single death penalty case cost $US3.07 million while a non-capital case cost an average of $US2.01 million, leaving a difference of about $US1.06 million. Adjusted for inflation in 2015, that means prosecutors seeking the death penalty cost Americans another $US1.15 million, making these cases 1.4 to 1.5 times more expensive." [4]





The DP cost rates would be similar in Australia.





II. The DP does not deter crime



According to the NCCADP, the DP does not deter crime. [5] The Australian Supreme Court has said there is no proof that the DP deters crime. [6] According to sociologist Dr. Michael Radelet, "Our survey indicates that the vast majority of the world’s top criminologists believe that the empirical research has revealed the deterrence hypothesis for a myth. ... 88.2% of polled criminologists do not believe that the death penalty is a deterrent." [7] The below graph shows the DP does not deter crime. [8]





The below graph illustrates another comparison between homicide rates and executions. [9]





Rebuttals



I propose life imprisonment an option over the DP, thus ensuring the convicted don't continue committing such capital crimes.



Conclusion



The DP's costs are extremely high and it does not deter crime, thus there is no reason to have a DP.



1. http://goo.gl...;
2. Ibid.
3. http://goo.gl...;
4. http://goo.gl...;
5. http://goo.gl...;
6. http://goo.gl...;
7. http://goo.gl...;
8. http://goo.gl...;
9. http://goo.gl...;
Debate Round No. 2
ArchonViserys

Pro

ArchonViserys forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
ArchonViserys

Pro

ArchonViserys forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
ArchonViserys

Pro

ArchonViserys forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

Extend. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
ArchonViserystejreticsTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided a very basic argument, with only 1 example, and no sources, then continued to forfeit the rest of the debate. Con provided quite a few arguments, including cost, and showing that there was no real correlation between the death penalty and the amount of crimes committed, these arguments were never responded to, so they stand throughout the entire debate, whereas Pro's arguments were refuted. Sources were only used by Con.
Vote Placed by ResponsiblyIrresponsible 1 year ago
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
ArchonViserystejreticsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by greatkitteh 1 year ago
greatkitteh
ArchonViserystejreticsTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FFS