The Instigator
Patjelly75
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
FaolinW
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

The Death Penalty should be illegal

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...
FaolinW
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/26/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,244 times Debate No: 19000
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

Patjelly75

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this valiant debate that I hope to start.

As the topic states, I, pro, am strongly against the Death Penalty based on 2 major reasons.

1. The cost of executing an inmate costs much more than the cost of keeping that prisoner for a life term. Thus, the Death Penalty is extremely inefficient.

2. Killing an inmate as an act of revenge is extremely immoral. Saying otherwise is hypocritical and ignorant.

I wish Con good luck, and I hope for a great debate!
FaolinW

Con

I believe the death penalty is acceptable. I believe this based on 3 major reasons.

1. If you take another persons life without an acceptable reason why should you be allowed to continue your own?

2. Even though the death penalty may be expensive it gives a sense of closure for the victims family.

3. Also instead of just ending the inmates life, you force him/her to live the rest of his/her life in a cell. I believe this to be like caging an animal and waiting for it to die. This is inhumane and cruel.

Best of luck. Lets have a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Patjelly75

Pro

My refutations:

1. "If you take another persons life without an acceptable reason why should you be allowed to continue your own?"

The answer to that question is simple. The "eye for an eye" way of thinking is inmoral. Very inmoral. Killing a murderer makes you no better than the murderer.

2. "Even though the death penalty may be expensive it gives a sense of closure for the victims family."

Closure to the family? What kind of family would get closure from watching a person die? That's sick. A truly mature and moral family would take comfort in knowing that the particular inmate that killed their family member had issues and his/her issues are being fixed and that the murderer would not harm anyone else. Any family that takes comfort in watching a human being gets killed should, themselves, be arrested and imprisoned for their crumbling mental health.

3. "Also instead of just ending the inmates life, you force him/her to live the rest of his/her life in a cell. I believe this to be like caging an animal and waiting for it to die. This is inhumane and cruel."

My opponent clearly states that he believes that dying is worse than living in confinement. I haven't heard a more ignorant statement. Death is very final in nature, while life is full of oppurtunities. For example, a man murders another man at while attending college. He is sentenced to life in prison without option of parole. He, at first, feels no regret in killing the unfortunate victom. But, after living the same routine every day, and having plenty of thinking time, the murderer thinks on his action and feels great regret. He lives the rest of his life feeling terrible about what he did. That, in my opinion, is the best possible punishment for a murderer.

FaolinW

Con

Valid points however:

1. "The answer to that question is simple. The "eye for an eye" way of thinking is immoral. Very immoral. Killing a murderer makes you no better than the murderer."

The "eye for an eye" way of thinking is not always immoral. If a kid were to steal something and then you steal something from him. That would not be the correct way to punish him. However, when a person kills another person, something needs to be done. Dying is a very final thing, and allowing a person that ended someone else's life to live out his entire life even if it is in jail will not fully punish him. Let him face the death penalty and be judged by God.

2. "Closure to the family? What kind of family would get closure from watching a person die? That's sick. A truly mature and moral family would take comfort in knowing that the particular inmate that killed their family member had issues and his/her issues are being fixed and that the murderer would not harm anyone else. Any family that takes comfort in watching a human being gets killed should, themselves, be arrested and imprisoned for their crumbling mental health."

How would you feel knowing that the person that murdered your family member is still living, breathing, and walking on this planet? Not all people have issues that can get fixed by sitting in a cell. The death penalty may not be acceptable for all cases, but when a person knowingly kills another, they should be punished to the full extent. People don't enjoy watching other humans being killed. However, sometimes it is necessary. It allows the family to finally end the dreams that haunt you after a family member is killed. It also allows them to see the face of the murder and if he does apologize and feel bad for what he did. May God have mercy on him.

3. "My opponent clearly states that he believes that dying is worse than living in confinement. I haven't heard a more ignorant statement. Death is very final in nature, while life is full of opportunities. For example, a man murders another man at while attending college. He is sentenced to life in prison without option of parole. He, at first, feels no regret in killing the unfortunate victim. But, after living the same routine every day, and having plenty of thinking time, the murderer thinks on his action and feels great regret. He lives the rest of his life feeling terrible about what he did. That, in my opinion, is the best possible punishment for a murderer."

Dying doesn't have to be worse than confinement. Dying can be a new beginning. If the person feels bad for what he did God will forgive him. Also, a life in confinement is not full of opportunities. It is just torture. That is immoral. If he has to take his entire life to realize that what he did is wrong then he really has problems. It also sounds like you feel that locking a man away for his life is a better form of revenge. It isn't about revenge. It is about the correct punishment.
Debate Round No. 2
Patjelly75

Pro

1. "The "eye for an eye" way of thinking is not always immoral. If a kid were to steal something and then you steal something from him. That would not be the correct way to punish him. However, when a person kills another person, something needs to be done. "

My opponent failed to provide any thorough debate in this porition. He, quite simply, restates that he believes in the death penatly. More is needed, my friend.

"Dying is a very final thing, and allowing a person that ended someone else's life to live out his entire life even if it is in jail will not fully punish him."

I will agree with Con on one thing: Dying IS a very final thing. That's why I am so firmly against the Death Penatly. As I stated in Round 2, I believe that a life jail term is a more fitting punishment than death, and Con failed to tell me why that is untrue.

"Let him face the death penalty and be judged by God."

Now we are entering an top in which I wish not to be included in this debate. Please leave religion out of your arguments. You cannot simply kill a man and use the excuse "God will judge him". No, your given only one life and you should be able to keep it. Regardless of if you killed a man or not.


2. "How would you feel knowing that the person that murdered your family member is still living, breathing, and walking on this planet? "

Once again, I will inform Con of my views on the subject, since he failed to pick them up in the first two rounds.
I would feel fine. Sure, I'd be struck with grief over my dead family member, but I wouldn't want the person killed. Killing is wrong and having murderer killed would just make me feel worse.

"Not all people have issues that can get fixed by sitting in a cell."

Very well, I agree. But, if they can't be fixed by spending time thinking about their crime, they are beyond repair, and are truly messed up. a fitting punishment would be a lifetime of boredom, much more fulfililng than death if you ask me.

" People don't enjoy watching other humans being killed. However, sometimes it is necessary."

Necessary to what, watch people die? It's never necessary to watch anyone die. As I stated before, that's just sick.

"It allows the family to finally end the dreams that haunt you after a family member is killed. It also allows them to see the face of the murder and if he does apologize and feel bad for what he did. "

What about watching a man being killed comfort anyone. It's an act of revenge. I can almost guarantee that the bad dreams will stop once you watch a person die. If you truly loved that individual, you will keep getting bad dreams until the day you day. And you probably wont even had bad dreams unless you witnessed the event.

"May God have mercy on him."

Again, enough of this garbage.


3. "Dying doesn't have to be worse than confinement. Dying can be a new beginning. If the person feels bad for what he did God will forgive him."

I am appaled by my opponent's statement on this topic. You CAN NOT kill someone and think it's okay because your mother brainwashed you into believing these fairy tales. You are given only one life! Enough the religion please.

"Also, a life in confinement is not full of opportunities. It is just torture. That is immoral."

At this point in the debate, I wish to ask my opponent what's immoral about living in confinment. You are given food, recreational time, and you make friends. Something this person could never achieve if he/she was killed before ever given a chance. Please, do explain...

If he has to take his entire life to realize that what he did is wrong then he really has problems.

I don't think it takes to much brain power to assume that the individual charged with murder already has to some big problems in their life. As long as the person realizes what he/she did, no matter when they do it, it is just fine.

"It also sounds like you feel that locking a man away for his life is a better form of revenge. It isn't about revenge. It is about the correct punishment."

I failed to find anywhere in my previous statement that indicated that I feel that confiment in jail is an act of revenge. I believe I DID state: "That, in my opinion, is the best possible punishment for a murderer."

My opponent is obviously extremely misinformed in this debate and I pity him. It has been fun debating though, and I wish to thank my opponent for taking the time out of his day to participate.

Vote Pro!!
FaolinW

Con

First off I would like to apologize for adding to religion into this debate.

Secondly I am going to keep this short.

My opponent states that he believes living in confinement for an entire lifetime is a better punishment then the death penalty because then the inmate has some time to do his/her thinking and feel bad about what he/she did. However, sentencing someone to a lifetime in jail with no parole is the death penalty only its stretched out to wait until you die instead of just ending it.

I'd like to thank my opponent for this debate. It has been fun.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JunnaY 4 years ago
JunnaY
The cost of death penalty is one issue that is extremely complex. The current recession has taken a toll on every little thing, such as the number of death sentences and executions. The biggest causes of the drop are imagined to be legal and ethical dilemmas along with costs. It is less likely that individuals will face the death penalty now. (See http://www.newsytype.com... for more data)
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Korashk 5 years ago
Korashk
Patjelly75FaolinWTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: All both debaters did was throw out assertions and participate in a battle of "nuh-uh, uh huh".
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
Patjelly75FaolinWTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not provide any sources to back up his ridiculous claims. He had logical fallacies all around.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Patjelly75FaolinWTied
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: Pros entire argument was that the death penalty is costly but did not analyze why cost was an issue, and that killing an inmate is cruel. Pro thinks the death penalty is issued guillotine style or with as much pain inflicted as possible when that is just not true. Con's mention of bringing closure to the families i think ultimately won him the debate... also Pro kept calling the con's views sick and left it at that so i gave con conduct