The Instigator
hectordebator
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
maxg7802
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

the death penalty is wrong

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
hectordebator
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2015 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 399 times Debate No: 74800
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

hectordebator

Pro

good luck all I hope you have fun
do not start debating untill the second round. that is why there is 4 rounds
maxg7802

Con

Hello I like football so this is a bit different for me...
Debate Round No. 1
hectordebator

Pro

This is the first round of debating

There is, in my opinion, 2 kinds of wrong. There is morally wrong and legally wrong.

The death penalty goes against our most basic human right - the right to life

Being killed by lethal injection or being electrocuted is not always smooth and painless, sometimes it causes a painful death
This violates any American's 8th amendment right. And is just a monstrous thing to do, would you really be prepared to watch another human suffer as you take there life? Just think about it.

No-one has ever proved with numbers that killing murderers stops other people committing similar crimes

Mistakes are sometimes made in the law - what if someone is killed who is actually innocent?

These are all points to consider, why don't we start using the death Penalty?
Well the answer is simple, 'An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind'.
That quote is so powerful and yet so true, we must think about how what the world would be like if we just when'd around killing anyone who commits a crime.
maxg7802

Con

Firstly, wrong use of there - should be their...
Anyway. I think that the death penalty is morally correct because if a person does something bad enough for them to have their life taken, for instance Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the man behind the Boston bombings, fully deserves his death penalty. However I think with crimes that aren't so global, for instance a shooting - nearly 100000 people get shot in the USA every year, the killer should have the choice to live in prison, in a special cell without human contact, like Nelson Mandela's cell, or to have a lethal injection to end their life. But I believe in the death penalty, but it shouldn't be enforced for lower key crimes without a mutual agreement.
Thanks.
Debate Round No. 2
hectordebator

Pro

This round will be used to make rebuttals on each others first debates.
I would like to ask my opponent why he is against the death penalty when I was informed that he/she was deeply for it.

Why would you want to end a man's life despite him being another human, and I understand that he killed many more people , but referring to my quote again 'an eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind'
maxg7802

Con

Unfortunately I cannot translate the term when'd around, but I would like to rebut the point where you said 'would you be prepared to watch another human take there (sic) life?' To be perfectly honest I would be very happy. Do you think that the soldier who killed Osama bin Laden thought for one second that he might have been taking somebody's life who had a family? No, it was a celebratory moment because he'd stopped a terrorist in his tracks.
Debate Round No. 3
hectordebator

Pro

I do have to agree that Osama Bin Laden was a truley evil man.

I would like to say now congratulations on finishing this debate, well done.

This is mainly becuase i have finshed my poutns
maxg7802

Con

Well done and thank you Hector.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by BootsWithDefer 1 year ago
BootsWithDefer
No, con, it IS "there"
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by KroneckerDelta 1 year ago
KroneckerDelta
hectordebatormaxg7802Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Pro. Con, don't make it a point to point out grammatical errors/misspellings unless they make the argument confusing--if I honestly think the spelling/grammar is egregious enough, I'll give points to the other person (I don't think it was egregious in this case). Both sides made extremely weak arguments but I don't see that Con addressed any of Pro's arguments. As best I can tell, Con's argument was: if somebody does something bad enough to warrant the death penalty, then they should receive the death penalty (e.g. Tsarnaev--which isn't even something I would consider to be true prima facie).
Vote Placed by Phenenas 1 year ago
Phenenas
hectordebatormaxg7802Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had a slightly more concise, stable conduct, while Con ignored opposing arguments for the most part. Neither had remarkable grammar, but neither stands out more than the other. Both of their arguments used too many specific examples or abstract ideas; there was no concrete point made or really argued. I didn't really like either case, but Pro brought up more points and gave a rebuttal to Con. Lastly, of course, neither used any sources.
Vote Placed by brad1999 1 year ago
brad1999
hectordebatormaxg7802Tied
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:14 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe pro had better content but con had more convincing tomorrow