Should we keep the death penalty?
Debate Rounds (4)
1,000 characters! Hopefully that'll be just the right amount.
I'm glad you challenged me to this debate, it's nice receiving debate requests regarding my opinions on big issues.
Anyway, let's get into this.
Right off the bat, I've found it costs (on average) between $20,000 and $40,000 a year to house an inmate , . So the main question is: is it worth it? And I would say yes. Death can be an escape, or an adventure for people. Even a "free pass," as we are unsure what happens after death - it could just be nothing. For people to be punished for their actions in their living lifetime would reduce the amount of crimes, as if people who shot up schools were only "set free of their lives," there wouldn't be much reason not to shoot up a school.
I'll give my own arguments next round, thanks!
For you to take a life sentence into consideration, you need to take into account of the actual amount of time spent in prison. For someone to really spend 80 years in prison, they would need to live to be 100+ while still in prison. The average life expectancy for people sentenced to prison at the age of 25 is 64 years , so that's about half of your 80 years. That means half of that $3.7million figure, which is about a million dollars less than execution.
So there goes the argument about money.
Alright, I'll bring up my point - there is zero punishment in the death penalty. People will die painlessly, and be set free from whatever Hell they're living in, or from whatever punishment they have to endure in real life. There is no pain in their "punishable" life time, and they can end their existence possibly not painfully at all, with possibly nothing after death.
I would like to acknowledge the statement "there is zero punishment in the death penalty." I don't think that this is true. Any bible believers out there would disagree with you. Judgement will happen after this person dies, and that punishment is worse then sitting in a nice jail cell getting fed.
Genesis 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.
Exodus 21:12 "Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death.
Those people who don't believe in the bible can think about this. Is it fair that they are still alive? Should we be spending any money at all keeping them alive? If a man kills another man, why should they still have the privilege of being alive? Life is the most precious thing on this earth is it not? Its not fair to the family's of the victims, that the killer is still alive and well.
If there is still an argument about money, please present it, as I have shown it costs less (on average) to keep a man in prison than put him to death.
If you wish to quote the Bible, you'll need to prove it is truly the word of God, and that God exists. The Bible is real like a state law book is real - it gives us morals to live by.
You're saying that because the Bible says to put someone to death who commits murder, it makes sense to execute him? What is death? The lack of life. What happens after death? Possibly, or probably nothing. For the result of killing someone to be... well, nothing... wouldn't make much sense, would it? Wouldn't it make much more sense to see physically that a murderer is actually paying for his actions, instead of being set free? Wouldn't you want to know for a fact he is being punished for killing an innocent human and destroying their families lives?
Or would you rather literally say "oh well maybe he's suffering, even though science says otherwise"?
You keep saying the same thing over and over. You made this into weather or not the afterlife exists. I will say my final statement one last time. I dont think that these people deserve to be on our planet. We are better off without them. If you imaginae the world with all the convicted murderers gone... I would want to live in that world. Thank you.
Mister_Man forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SebUK 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Mister Man showed that the death penalty is more expensive which Pro did not really fully respond back to , Pro also used a religious argument which was dissapointing to see as we do not live in a theocracy and our laws should not be based on religion.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.