The Instigator
Grace_loves_debate
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Skepticalone
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

the death penalty???

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...
Skepticalone
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 75848
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Grace_loves_debate

Con

hello so we have to do debates in class and no one is for the death penalty so I cannot do the arguments there, but I would still like to share my opinions about the death penalty so here I am. by the way I get very heated while I debate and will become very offensive at times to put my point across, so I apologize in advance for my behavior that is sure to come.

first off whomever answers the debate is a sick and twisted human being with ought morals. secondly how dare you think that you could ever play god and judge who lives and who dies. and to follow up you are a straight up murderer.
Skepticalone

Pro

I accept. Good luck, Con!
Debate Round No. 1
Grace_loves_debate

Con

thank you for accepting the debate, I hope you learn a few things and that you can have a new view on the topic. at the very least I hope that you can understand the other side of the argument.

Unlike like what most people say, the death penalty does not create relief for the families, it actually means years of appeals and having to relive the pain of the deaths of their children. bill and Denise Richards have advocated for the Boston marathon bomber to not suffer the death penalty.

"We are in favor of and would support the Department of Justice in taking the death penalty off the table in exchange for the defendant spending the rest of his life in prison without any possibility of release and waiving all of his rights to appeal,"

"Many victims" families, like the Richards, oppose execution because of the enduring pain of a prolonged litigation battle."

"They are offended by the idea that states are putting people to death on their behalf, for the benefit of their healing, or their revenge."

"There"s a false promise that this is going to heal you. This trial, this execution is going to make you feel better," Kristin Froehlich, whose brother was murdered in Connecticut, told ThinkProgress at a conference for murder victims" families last October

"There"s a false promise that this is going to heal you. This trial, this execution is going to make you feel better."

"When you see the legal process up close, it doesn"t take long to figure out that what"s right and what"s wrong " justice and the law, and what"s right " who can afford a good lawyer, who can"t afford a good lawyer " there"s a big difference," he told WBUR. said bob Curley.

"In the eyes of society, their son"s name forever would be associated with cruelty and violence, rather than the human dignity and mercy he embodied in life. bob and Lola Autobee."

"The Richard's reasons for opposing the death penalty for the murderer of their child are certainly valid ones. If my child (or any close family member of mine) was murdered, I can't think of too many things more painful than having to deal with endless court time on the matter. Also as a society already filled with violence and hate we should not be advocating that murder is okay if it is justified.

Another reason I would oppose the death penalty for my child's killer -- I believe that loss of freedom is a worse punishment than loss of life. I would want that killer to live every day with the knowledge that he murdered my child. And I would hope he would live a long time with that knowledge. Locked away, of course."

http://thinkprogress.org...

as you can see there are many instances where parents have come to the realization that the death penalty is not worth it and that rather than pushing for revenge to the greatest offence they can move on knowing that the murderer has lost their freedom and any chance at a normal life in society.
Skepticalone

Pro

Thank you, Grace!

First off, since Con is going against the status quo, she bears the burden in this debate.
However, I intend to present arguments as well as address her case.




Arguments


Deterrence and Justice



“Deterrence is a theory from behavioral psychology about preventing or controlling actions or behavior through fear of punishment or retribution. This theory of criminology is shaping the criminal justice system of the United States and various other countries”
[1]

Guilty people deserve to be punished in proportion to the severity of their crime. Horrible acts demand suitable punishments. Without appropriate punishment for these crime then the lives of the victims are devalued. For example, a convicted serial killer should not be extended a right which he took away from others, and that he has shown no regard for. To allow a killer to cling to life when he has unjustifiably taken life suggests that we respect his life more than those forfeited. Justice will continue to be off balance until unless the punishment fits the crime. Executing convicted murderers is just.

Additionally, we deter other would be murderers from committing the same acts when the punishment is equivalent to the crime.





As can be seen from the charts above, when executions ceased the murder rate climbed, and when executions happen more regularly then the murder rate dropped.

Rebuttals


Con relies heavily on the testimony of a grieving family. I feel the greatest sympathy for the family, and in no way wish to diminish their loss. However, the writer of this article and Con are essentially exploiting their story as an emotional appeal to advocate against the status quo. This is a process that should be approached logically, but an appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy and by definition is not logical. That being said, I will not provide an alternative emotional appeal in response.

Let me respond to a few issues in Cons case:

"They are offended by the idea that states are putting people to death on their behalf, for the benefit of their healing, or their revenge."

The state does not seek the death penalty on behalf of the victim’s families. The dispensing of this punishment is on behalf of the victims and society in general. Any healing/revenge derived from the process by the victim’s families is irrelevant.

"When you see the legal process up close, it doesn"t take long to figure out that what"s right and what"s wrong " justice and the law, and what"s right " who can afford a good lawyer, who can"t afford a good lawyer " there"s a big difference," he told WBUR. said bob Curley.

By her quote, Con relies on anecdotal evidence to suggest that it is common place for wealthy criminals to go free and poor innocents to be found guilty. However, this does not establish anything other than her (or Bob Curley’s) opinion. I am willing to concede that our system is not perfect, but that is a problem with the justice system itself and not an argument against capital punishment.

"The Richard's reasons for opposing the death penalty for the murderer of their child are certainly valid ones. If my child (or any close family member of mine) was murdered, I can't think of too many things more painful than having to deal with endless court time on the matter. Also as a society already filled with violence and hate we should not be advocating that murder is okay if it is justified.

Murder is defined as unlawfully killing a human, and as such, it cannot be justified in legal proceedings. Con is attempting to poison the well with her language. Capital punishment is not murder.

My opponent desires a fate worse than death for the hypothetical killer of her child and her statement clearly illustrates a desire for revenge. See below:

Another reason I would oppose the death penalty for my child's killer -- I believe that loss of freedom is a worse punishment than loss of life. I would want that killer to live every day with the knowledge that he murdered my child. And I would hope he would live a long time with that knowledge. Locked away, of course."

However, in the very next paragraph she argues that the death penalty is motivated by revenge.

as you can see there are many instances where parents have come to the realization that the death penalty is not worth it and that rather than pushing for revenge to the greatest offence…

My opponent contradicts her own argument. If revenge is not a valid justification for capital punishment, then it is not a valid justification for any other type of punishment.

Hopefully, I will have a little more time to devote to the next round, and I apologize for Con having to wait as long as she did for me to submit this. Back to you Ms. Grace!

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://www.prodeathpenalty.com...

Debate Round No. 2
Grace_loves_debate

Con

Grace_loves_debate forfeited this round.
Skepticalone

Pro

Unfortunately, my opponent has been unable to submit her round 3. I extend everything.
Debate Round No. 3
Grace_loves_debate

Con

Grace_loves_debate forfeited this round.
Skepticalone

Pro

Extend everything.
Debate Round No. 4
Grace_loves_debate

Con

Grace_loves_debate forfeited this round.
Skepticalone

Pro

Unfortunately, Con has provided nothing of substance for her position. My arguments and rebuttal stand unchallenged. Vote Pro - thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Skepticalone 1 year ago
Skepticalone
I'm sorry to hear that Grace. I was wondering what happened!
Posted by Grace_loves_debate 1 year ago
Grace_loves_debate
sorry i got grounded and lost laptop privileges
Posted by Grace_loves_debate 1 year ago
Grace_loves_debate
sorry i got grounded and lost laptop privileges
Posted by Grace_loves_debate 1 year ago
Grace_loves_debate
okay no prob
Posted by Skepticalone 1 year ago
Skepticalone
My schedule has changed, Grace. I will submit my arguments tomorrow.
Posted by TruthHurts 1 year ago
TruthHurts
Being heated without bringing any substantive argumentation or warranting work to the table just makes you look ignorant, and I agree with your side.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by YamaVonKarma 1 year ago
YamaVonKarma
Grace_loves_debateSkepticaloneTied
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: If con will not debate, they will recieve no points. I award pro a full vote.
Vote Placed by banjos42 1 year ago
banjos42
Grace_loves_debateSkepticaloneTied
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: Conduct goes to pro because of con's forfeitures. Con quoted people who were against the death penalty and gave their reasoning. Pro's proportion argument was good enough to up those quoted people.
Vote Placed by n7 1 year ago
n7
Grace_loves_debateSkepticaloneTied
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: Ff. Arguments to pro. He was the last to make arguments and rebuttals plus his argument was better than Con's. He had charts and a real argument, instead of arguing that it doesn't help the families.