The Instigator
McNichol
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
PARADIGM_L0ST
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

should the death penalty be brought to Canada

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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2011 Category: Education
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,914 times Debate No: 17574
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

McNichol

Pro

I believe that if that if there were more harsh punishments in Canada for certain crimes, overtime, criminals would rethink committing such crimes due to the fact they would be put to death
PARADIGM_L0ST

Con

I'd like to take this moment to thank my opponent for instigating this debate. It is my genuine hope that the participants and the audience is both entertained by our exchange, if not learn something new in the process.

=== CLARIFICATION ===

The title of the debate is prefaced on a question, and that's whether or not Canada ought to institute the death penalty in Canada. He begins his argument by insinuating that the death penalty would serve as a deterrence to serious crime. In fact, that is the only reason PRO gives at this point in time. If PRO has any other reasons why it ought to be instituted in Canada, I believe it would be beneficial to the debate if he categorically states it for the sake of clarity.

Because this is his only argument in defense of his position, I will respond in kind to the single argument until I receive clarification.

=== OPENING ARGUMENTS ===

Though I am not a Canadian citizen, I nonetheless have vested interests in the affairs of my northern neighbors. As an American, I know the consequences (unintended or otherwise) that come with the death penalty. In fact, it is my earnest belief that they not import it in to their country for all the reasons that I will share throughout the course of the debate.

P1. Deterrence: Does the death penalty offer a deterrence to would-be killers? According to the data, the answer is, no. States that implement the death penalty statistically have higher incidences of murder per capita than states that do not have capital punishment laws on the books.

For instance, Louisiana, a state which endorses the death penalty, has the highest incidence of murder per capita than any other state in the US.

"A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states without the death penalty." [1]

Of course, we all know that correlation does not equal causation. Please do not misunderstand me to mean that states that have the death penalty are necessarily going to have more murders per capita than those that don't. I am saying, however, that statistical analysis shows a disparity, and that it not only does not support PRO's argument, but is actually undermined and contradicted by the numbers.

We can reasonably infer that there most certainly is no correlation to assume that the death penalty is a deterrence, particularly for crimes of passion committed emotively without premeditation on the spur of the moment.

What we could also reasonably infer is that demographics matter a lot, particularly the population density, the racial and cultural climate, the income median, other criminal statistics, etc. All these factors must also be examined as reasons for why people are more willing to commit murder than others, why they are more or less calloused to murder, why they are statistically more or less prone to violence, etc.

=== SOURCES ===

1. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
Debate Round No. 1
McNichol

Pro

McNichol forfeited this round.
PARADIGM_L0ST

Con

My first argument stands until contested.
Debate Round No. 2
McNichol

Pro

McNichol forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 5 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
I think he was being sarcastice...Must have been making fun of Americans....;)
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 5 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Dude our crime rate isn't even that high.. what are you smoking... we want people to follow the rules because the are just and reasonable. not by simply fear...
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
McNicholPARADIGM_L0STTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
McNicholPARADIGM_L0STTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
McNicholPARADIGM_L0STTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by thett3 6 years ago
thett3
McNicholPARADIGM_L0STTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 6 years ago
Man-is-good
McNicholPARADIGM_L0STTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro, this is the consequence of instigating numerous debates, and failing to respond in time to each of the rebuttals present in them. It is a great frustration for the opposing member to wait for your reply, so therefore the felicitous approach to a forfeit is to conceed all seven points to the opposing member....To be brief, Con earns all seven points.