The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

The death penalty should not be used.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/22/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,383 times Debate No: 14119
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




The death penalty is a waste of a valuable resource. Many laws in western civilisation is based on the Bible and Christian teaching. It is no wonder then that one of the most popular justifications for the death penalty is the "eye for an eye" mentality. I could go down the "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind" route but I see a different approach. The killing of anybody who commits a crime such as murder is a way for some to get retribution and to give closure to the friends and family of the victims, is short sighted and shows a flaw in character. Not only does it show an inability to even attempt forgiveness but an inability also to see the larger picture. What would you prefer, a quick death, or a lifetime in prison, where you have to live with yourself and face what you have done? A lifetime by oneself is enough to break anyone and to make them truly repent. "An eye for an eye"? The family and friends of any victims must be strong and wait for the retribution. It will be larger closure in the long term and can lead to forgiving.

You may be asking yourself now about the financial side of this. Sure it may be better for the victims, but what about the tax payer? Is it not cheaper to just kill the criminal rather than feed and house them? If the prison system was left as it is then yes you are correct, it would be cheaper to kill them. However these damned criminals are an untapped resource, waiting to be used. How many man hours of work are wasted and put to death each year. If correctly and justly carried out, prisoners could pay for themselves several times over in labour and help the society they have harmed. Imagine, a killer could be in a secure factory making clothes, manufacturing products, growing food or even making wheelchairs, for barely anything. You could have the kind of workforce you have in the east on home soil.

This does not just provide a way of punishing criminals, it gets work done and also provides a deterrent for all. I know I would not want to work for the next 30 years of my life in a factory.

My final point I would like to raise is one of the problems with the death penalty at the moment. The legal system at the moment as a whole works reasonably well at sorting the criminals from the innocent. However no matter what there will always be some who are falsely convicted. People cannot be simply freed after the death penalty, an evidence can often come forth years after any trial. You can see the trouble. I would definitely not want to be the one to put an innocent man to death.

That is why I believe the death penalty to be wrong.


Lets not waste time and begin:
o Burden of proof
The death penalty has been practiced for thousands of years ; my opponent as the instigator has the burden of proof.
o My opponents arguments
-" Many laws in western civilisation is based on the Bible and Christian teaching"
You have the burden of proof.
-"What would you prefer, a quick death, or a lifetime in prison, where you have to live with yourself and face what you have done?"
Depends on the person and the prison.
To this I say - justice.
-Prisoners having a job
I am afraid prisoners do not have a job. They may have a job in the future or in your world but not at the moment. Personally I strongly support this idea but it is not practiced.
-"I would definitely not want to be the one to put an innocent man to death."
Nor would I, but I doubt that someone who has been so unlucky that he is wrongly accused of a crime deserving
capital punishment would have any chance of being proven innocent.
o My Arguments
Eye for an eye. It is not that I hate or have blood-lust. I simply advocate a civil society, where we can live in peace without being picked off like ducks during "Open Season". After the convict dies - a very humane death, by the way - he will never again be able to harm another person. Not another inmate, not a prison guard, not an innocent child . . . and no one in my family.
If I had no mercy in my heart, I would want each killer to die in the manner they took a life. That would be true justice. But it would not be merciful.
-Final words
You want to end capital punishment; show me a better, more humane and just way to deal with the criminals, and still ensure the safety of society and I'll support it wholeheartedly. Until then I will continue to live in the current realities of the world, and not by the assumption that others given the right education, opportunities, and motivation will deem my life as precious as their own.
Debate Round No. 1


DifferentView forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


DifferentView forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by m93samman 5 years ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01