The Instigator
DestinyFate
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
Scarmiglione
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Should the death penalty be used on violent criminals?

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...
DestinyFate
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/14/2014 Category: News
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 976 times Debate No: 56605
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

DestinyFate

Con

Death simply is too fast, and does not teach a lesson to criminals. The death penalty would take away just ONE criminal life for many other lives that were killed by it. There should be a non-violent punishment(like making dangerous criminals go to a soundproof dark room for one day, and then keeping them in prison). A life-sentence without parole is also a good way to teach criminals their lesson.
Scarmiglione

Pro

I'm in for this debate comrade. The death penalty as it is now, is absolutely nothing. Its secluded, its relatively fast, and they are trying to make it even less painful as times passes (some morphine injections and similar serine stuff). The point of a death penalty is to instill fear. There is nothing more frightening as slow torture ending with death. Even slow beheading can put quite some shock into people (just google "iraqi beheading" and watch carefully). When you see someone dying in agony and even begging to be killed quickly, you kinda don't want to be in their skin. How would one be in their skin? If some one did something gruesome. After seeing a violent torture and death which will be forever engraved in your brain, you will think even more so about doing something... you shouldn't be doing, with great care. Of course, not everyone gets frightened (there are some people who are so dumb or sick they don't get touched by this) but, by killing such people, you not only instill fear as a preservative, but death as a preservative. If a killer is alive, people die linearly, while a death of a killer is a constant, a sweet, juicy constant.

I'm looking forward to a counter argument buddy, and sorry if I mistyped something. I'm not anglophone, and I certainly don't favor retarded english "spelling"....
Debate Round No. 1
DestinyFate

Con

According to http://www.deathpenalty.org... , California ( a state in the US) spends about 186 million dollars on death penalties. That's because the Constitution of the United States of America enforces a long, complicated, and very expensive process for one to get the death penalty. As you see, my friend, the death penalty is not short and easy, it is actually very long and complicated. Also the death penalty not efficient. Using the death penalty, the government is killing one criminal life for multiple lives that were killed by the criminal. Also the death penalty will not decrease the number of crimes. Criminals will not learn if you simply kill them. One day of painless torture and a life sentence without a parole is the best way to teach criminals a lesson. Also remember that money I was talking about, the US spends on an average of 3 billion dollars every year on death penalty cases. The government can decrease the cost with a life sentence without parole and use the remaining 1-2 billion dollars schools, road, and etc. The death penalty is an old system that is carried on today, but now with Alcatraz and other secure prisons. We do not need the long, complicated, and very expensive death penalty cases.
Scarmiglione

Pro

"According to http://www.deathpenalty.org...... , California ( a state in the US) spends about 186 million dollars on death penalties. That's because the Constitution of the United States of America enforces a long, complicated, and very expensive process for one to get the death penalty.As you see, my friend, the death penalty is not short and easy, it is actually very long and complicated."

The only thing I can say about America, the states and their activities.... is "FUNK AMERICA!!!"... that abominable parasitic entity is no gauge in anything worthwhile. Hell, they spent more money for "war against terrorism" than on cancer studies, what does that tell you? The only thing that should be expensive is finding out the truth about the crime and finding out who is the culprit.

" Also the death penalty not efficient. Using the death penalty, the government is killing one criminal life for multiple lives that were killed by the criminal. Also the death penalty will not decrease the number of crimes. Criminals will not learn if you simply kill them. One day of painless torture and a life sentence without a parole is the best way to teach criminals a lesson. "

Nothing is efficient if you do it wrong. I don't see where you are going with that 1 criminal- many victims argument, that's going to my favor really :D. If you want death penalty to be efficient, you must make it painful to watch, but accessible
to everyone. If witnessing unbelievable pain and agony doesn't make you scared, nothing will.

I also see you like to mention cost a lot. In any rational system(thus, not America), providing shelter and resources for criminals to just dwell would be far more costly then just killing them with amazing fervor. In both cases you have to prove
the guilt, so , logically, torturing someone with crude ,cheap instruments is way cheaper than keeping these bastards alive.

In truth, none of usare right. The best way to handle these monsters is to keep tem alive... and torture them, until they die of "natural expiration" :D
Of course, people must be permitted to see such magnificence in some way (internet, TV) otherwise, it is all just a waste of money and time. If you don't spread the word, don't expect anyone to react. And by the way.... "painless torture?" Look up the word torture buddy.

T'was nice debating with you, pal. :D
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Scarmiglione 2 years ago
Scarmiglione
hehehehe.... dumb butthurt US abominations :D
Posted by Scarmiglione 2 years ago
Scarmiglione
It seems this site is.... dead? People don't fancy arguing, I guess.... ironically
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
DestinyFateScarmiglioneTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Full and clear victory by Con; Pro's conduct was horrible. Stattements such as "The only thing I can say about America, the states and their activities.... is "FUNK AMERICA!!!"" and " that's going to my favor really :D" are simply childish and immature. Spelling and grammar goes to Con, obviously. Let's look at Pro's final sentence: "T'was nice debating with you, pal. :D" That should explain it. Convincing arguments and reliable sources are clearly won by Con, for reasons I do not even need to mention, but I will anyway: Con used more sources, implemented them into his arguments more effectively, and had longer, more complex, and less biased arguments.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
DestinyFateScarmiglioneTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 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: Pro used emoticons and phrases like "funk America". poor grammar. con was the only one to use a source.