The Instigator
27671
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
wjmelements
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

capitol punishment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
wjmelements
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/12/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,541 times Debate No: 12537
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (3)

 

27671

Pro

Nice to meet you sir.
I would like to debate why you are against capitol punishment for a serious offense such as murder.
wjmelements

Con

A person seriously offended of their rights to govern themselves and their property is not compensated by a death penalty. Depriving the offender of his life only removes the person who must be held liable for his damages. Because of this, it is preferable to deprive the offender of their rights until just amends have been made.

In the case of murder, as mentioned by my opponent, one cannot expect to resurrect the victim by such means, but adding another death doesn't accomplish this either. The friends or relatives, however, can be at least compensated, by an amount equal to the total expected income of the victim for the full duration of his life, plus other arbitrary damages for lost safety, happiness, utility, etc. The offender shall be subjected to slavery until compensation is made in full.

Surely, this is more just than capital punishment, for the victims receive amends equal to the damage taken and the offender receives just punishment equal to the damage done. Thank you
Debate Round No. 1
27671

Pro

27671 forfeited this round.
wjmelements

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent had to forfeit round 2. I hope that circumstance allows his return for round 3.
Debate Round No. 2
27671

Pro

27671 forfeited this round.
wjmelements

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent never made an argument, so the voter should default CON. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by J.Kenyon 6 years ago
J.Kenyon
I haven't finished it yet (about half way through), but it's incredibly engaging. When I told him I was reading it, my philosophy professor had some good things to say about it, as well as Nozick in general.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
I've wanted to read AS&U for a while, but I haven't had the time. Maybe next summer.
Posted by J.Kenyon 6 years ago
J.Kenyon
For a New Liberty and The Ethics of Liberty are both awesome, though they cover a lot of the same things. However, I still think Anarchy, State, and Utopia is the definitive work on libertarianism.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
My exposure to Rothbard is limited to his Libertarian Manifesto and Power and Market, but the opinion I presented here originated in the manifesto. I've altered it only minorly.
Posted by mcc1789 6 years ago
mcc1789
@wjmelements Succinct and to the point. If you have not, I think you should read Murray Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, Chapter 13: Punishment and Proportionality. He goes into detail over this point. (P.S. I don't agree, but it makes for interesting reading in any case). I would add the other classic arguement: the danger of executing an innocent person. Rothard solves it by having every person liable for their action, with no defense of "the evidence appeared sound" to be permitted.

This is a step in the right direction, but as you note there is nothing that can bring them back (excepting some future in which people can be resurrected whole). Someone working off the debt, on the other hand, can be exonerated, freed and in fact sue the original claimant for false accusation, loss of liberty, property, etc. Rothbard, while still permitting capital punishment at maximum, felt it was also fine to demand a lesser sanction, like your proposal, or even complete forgiveness (he clarified it saying wills could specify the punishment desired of the testator's possible murderer).
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
lol, the semantical approach would have been hilarious.
Posted by Valtarov 6 years ago
Valtarov
Your argument reminds of Somali law, which is similar to many other culture's rules as well. If you kill someone, you owe his family a hundred camels.
Posted by Valtarov 6 years ago
Valtarov
wjmelements, that was the best Con argument to capital punishment I've ever heard.

Though I would have played semantics and argued against the punishment of the nation's capitol.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
Darn character limit.
Posted by 27671 6 years ago
27671
done
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by FREEDO 6 years ago
FREEDO
27671wjmelementsTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Meursault 6 years ago
Meursault
27671wjmelementsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
27671wjmelementsTied
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