Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Death Penalty

W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 3:50:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

The US is a violent place because partly the government isnt as nannystate as most other nations.

Ask the Israelis how to deal with inherant violence.
W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 4:01:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:50:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

The US is a violent place because partly the government isnt as nannystate as most other nations.

Ask the Israelis how to deal with inherant violence.

What do you mean by "nannystate"? And how am I supporting the Borg? I mean this is a debate about the Death Penalty, not about some cyborgs in Star Trek.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 4:04:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:01:47 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:50:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

The US is a violent place because partly the government isnt as nannystate as most other nations.

Ask the Israelis how to deal with inherant violence.

What do you mean by "nannystate"? And how am I supporting the Borg? I mean this is a debate about the Death Penalty, not about some cyborgs in Star Trek.

I was specifically addressing the whole DP doesn't affect crime rate or USA has a greater crime rate vs such and such country....

There are way more things to consider than just the DP when analyzing the crime rate and violence in the US. Also, we need realistic approaches to deal with the violence.
W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 4:12:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:04:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:01:47 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:50:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

The US is a violent place because partly the government isnt as nannystate as most other nations.

Ask the Israelis how to deal with inherant violence.

What do you mean by "nannystate"? And how am I supporting the Borg? I mean this is a debate about the Death Penalty, not about some cyborgs in Star Trek.

I was specifically addressing the whole DP doesn't affect crime rate or USA has a greater crime rate vs such and such country....

There are way more things to consider than just the DP when analyzing the crime rate and violence in the US. Also, we need realistic approaches to deal with the violence.

Ok. As a Swiss citizen I can proudly say that our country has abolished the DP a long time ago. But as an American when do you think that the US will make that step. Recently I read on an american newspaper online (don't remember wich one) that approx. 50 % of Americans would be ready to embrace abolition if the DP would be replaced by life imprisonment.
Would be interesting to see the opinion of an American.
Any way have a nice day.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 4:19:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:12:17 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:04:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:01:47 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:50:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

The US is a violent place because partly the government isnt as nannystate as most other nations.

Ask the Israelis how to deal with inherant violence.

What do you mean by "nannystate"? And how am I supporting the Borg? I mean this is a debate about the Death Penalty, not about some cyborgs in Star Trek.

I was specifically addressing the whole DP doesn't affect crime rate or USA has a greater crime rate vs such and such country....

There are way more things to consider than just the DP when analyzing the crime rate and violence in the US. Also, we need realistic approaches to deal with the violence.

Ok. As a Swiss citizen I can proudly say that our country has abolished the DP a long time ago. But as an American when do you think that the US will make that step. Recently I read on an american newspaper online (don't remember wich one) that approx. 50 % of Americans would be ready to embrace abolition if the DP would be replaced by life imprisonment.
Would be interesting to see the opinion of an American.
Any way have a nice day.

Th Swiss have insanely strict laws governing citizenship, boast a large ratio of citizens owning guns, has a unified hegomony of very similar (not as diverse as USA) citizens. There is no way you can say DP has the main affect on the lack of Swiss violence and not consider those other 3 factors. Be reasonable. It's easy to abolish DP in a non-violent country.
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 6:30:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.

Sorry to tell you that those statistics aren't made up at all, you can check them out here:
http://www.pnas.org...

As to the cost you should check the website from the "proposition 34" initiative (that sadly failed):
http://www.safecalifornia.org...
numberwang
Posts: 1,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 7:34:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

Then try "there is evidence the DP doesnt deter crime", because there is.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

Not at all made up unfortunatly, the study was fairly in depth.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

You clearly arent counting your cost of execution right, or youre just ignoring the huge cost difference between trying a DP case vs a life in prison case. Because 500000 is not how much a death penalty case costs.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

Its not, however, irrelevant to the state carrying out the justice. And for all of the extra cost of the death penalty with no benefit taking the cheap route is certainly an incentive to lose the penalty.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
Haroush
Posts: 1,329
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 9:39:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
There is no evidence keeping people in prison helps them become better people in society either.

Also, if our president can spend millions of dollars on a website that doesn't work, why can't we spend money on getting these criminals the death penalty. At least if you get rid of people who have no worth in society, people will not have to pay unnecessary taxes for these prisoners who have no worth in society.

Lastly, there is only a small percentage around 2-5% that are innocent who get the death penalty (closer to 2%). The point is the system is fair and it works.

By the way, the average cost per prisoner per year is $31,286.

Then if we think about the cost in total when we multiply the cost by the number of prisoners, it looks something like this..

1,571,013 multiplied by the cost is $49,150,712,718! Really?!?

And we shouldn't use the death penalty to get rid of prisoners who don't want to do better and become a part of society???

Screw that! We don't have the money as a nation to keep feeding some of these no good pieces of crap!

And if the death penalty were to be abolished, well then prisoners shouldn't have no televisions to watch. Nor any other types of entertainment. It's called prison for a reason. It's not a rehabilitation center.

Side Note: They shouldn't be using these prisoners as guinea pigs to gain a better understanding of psychiatric medications either!

If this was the case then we would have no need for prisons. Furthermore, prisoners shouldn't be taking jobs from citizens who are productive parts of society.

It's not right prisoners have all these programs set up for them, but yet your average American is treated like dirt by their own government!

This is what we call a nanny state and this is all I have to say about that.
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 10:44:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 6:30:56 AM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.

Sorry to tell you that those statistics aren't made up at all, you can check them out here:
http://www.pnas.org...

So, you misread the study. In fact, the study supports *my* side. The study argues that because the pressures inherent in the death penalty appeals system, when death row inmates have their sentences commuted to life imprisonment their probability of being freed drops significantly. The study estimates that were they all left on death row, 4.1% of the total death row inmates would be freed. The study says absolutely nothing about false executions.

Here's what I wrote in my debate with Dtaylor when I compared the statistics:

"This actually serves as an argument against LWOP---if we wrongly convict this many death row inmates, where jurors apply a much stricter standard for conviction and where innocence watch dog groups actually pay attention--how many lifers are wrongly convicted, left to die behind bars? The numbers suggest a lot. The National Registry of Exonerations reports that since 1989 there have been 1339 exonerations[5]. About 500 of these were from life sentences of some kind. NTY says that in 2009 there were 140,000 people serving life sentences, most of which would've been for murder. Analysis of this data shows that *far fewer* people sentenced to life in prison are freed (500/140,000, ~0.35%) compared to those those freed from death sentences (about 100 sinces 1989/3095 current inmates[6] is around 3%) despite *vastly lower* sentencing standards. Thus, since life imprisonment seems less urgent and inmates don't have automatic appeals like death row inmates do, far fewer innocents get freed.

It looks like life imprisonment actually protects the innocent less than death does. "

As to the cost you should check the website from the "proposition 34" initiative (that sadly failed):
http://www.safecalifornia.org...

California should probably abolish the death penalty because it monumentally fails to actually use it while concurring huge costs. It's better to look at states which actually execute people like Texas or Virginia or Oklahoma before comparing costs.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 11:07:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 7:34:36 AM, numberwang wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

Then try "there is evidence the DP doesnt deter crime", because there is.

That's crazy talk. *Of course* the death penalty deters some murder. The question is how many? Unless you think that no penalty deters any crime, reducing the incentive to murder by having a tougher penalty is going to deter some crimes.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

Not at all made up unfortunatly, the study was fairly in depth.

You clearly didn't read the study then. Because, yeah.

"The high rate of exoneration among death-sentenced defendants appears to be driven by the threat of execution, but most death-sentenced defendants are removed from death row and resentenced to life imprisonment, after which the likelihood of exoneration drops sharply. We use survival analysis to model this effect, and estimate that if all death-sentenced defendants remained under sentence of death indefinitely, at least 4.1% would be exonerated."

See above for my argument of why the death penalty actually helps innocents, an argument this study has just bolstered immensely.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

You clearly arent counting your cost of execution right, or youre just ignoring the huge cost difference between trying a DP case vs a life in prison case. Because 500000 is not how much a death penalty case costs.

Mmm I don't think so. The data is actually more limited than you think because it's only worth it to look at states which actually execute people. California, for example, doesn't actually have a death penalty. All they have is a very expensive form of life imprisonment. The DPIC cites an article[1]e that claims the legal costs of a death penalty case from indictment to execution in Texas to be 1.2 million. The article says to house an inmate for a year it costs $17,340. So it takes Texas about 10 years to kill someone, so let's take on $173,400 to the legal costs. About 1.4 million. The same article claims that the housing costs alone for a life imprisonment case are about $700,000. The article makes the *insanely ridiculous and false* claim that life imprisonment trials cost a mere $3,000 each which is insanely false but let's say I'm generous about accept it.

That would mean the death penalty, in a state that actually kills people unlike California, costs about $700,000 more (probably about $500,000 because all first degree murder cases are very expensive) not counting the costs the death penalty offsets by plea bargaining. Well, the societal cost of a murder to society is estimated in various studies, but the National Institute of Health estimates it to be about $9 million or so with a range of "$4,144,677 to $11,350,687"[2]. I've seen another study pinning the number at $17.2 million.

Thus to make the death penalty worth it, economically, we only need to accept that the each execution deters or prevents (as a dead murderer can no longer kill), oh, at most 1/6th of a murder ($4.4 million/ $.7 million) and using the average . Using the actual cost assumption of $9 million, each execution needs only to deter/prevent about 1/13th of a murder to be worth it. Given some (admittedly dubious) studies that argue each execution deters several murders, and the logic that people follow their incentives, that's a bargain I'll take.

1. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

Its not, however, irrelevant to the state carrying out the justice. And for all of the extra cost of the death penalty with no benefit taking the cheap route is certainly an incentive to lose the penalty.


-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 11:18:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 11:07:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/4/2014 7:34:36 AM, numberwang wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

Then try "there is evidence the DP doesnt deter crime", because there is.

That's crazy talk. *Of course* the death penalty deters some murder. The question is how many? Unless you think that no penalty deters any crime, reducing the incentive to murder by having a tougher penalty is going to deter some crimes.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

Not at all made up unfortunatly, the study was fairly in depth.

You clearly didn't read the study then. Because, yeah.

"The high rate of exoneration among death-sentenced defendants appears to be driven by the threat of execution, but most death-sentenced defendants are removed from death row and resentenced to life imprisonment, after which the likelihood of exoneration drops sharply. We use survival analysis to model this effect, and estimate that if all death-sentenced defendants remained under sentence of death indefinitely, at least 4.1% would be exonerated."

See above for my argument of why the death penalty actually helps innocents, an argument this study has just bolstered immensely.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

You clearly arent counting your cost of execution right, or youre just ignoring the huge cost difference between trying a DP case vs a life in prison case. Because 500000 is not how much a death penalty case costs.

Mmm I don't think so. The data is actually more limited than you think because it's only worth it to look at states which actually execute people. California, for example, doesn't actually have a death penalty. All they have is a very expensive form of life imprisonment. The DPIC cites an article[1]e that claims the legal costs of a death penalty case from indictment to execution in Texas to be 1.2 million. The article says to house an inmate for a year it costs $17,340. So it takes Texas about 10 years to kill someone, so let's take on $173,400 to the legal costs. About 1.4 million. The same article claims that the housing costs alone for a life imprisonment case are about $700,000. The article makes the *insanely ridiculous and false* claim that life imprisonment trials cost a mere $3,000 each which is insanely false but let's say I'm generous about accept it.

That would mean the death penalty, in a state that actually kills people unlike California, costs about $700,000 more (probably about $500,000 because all first degree murder cases are very expensive) not counting the costs the death penalty offsets by plea bargaining. Well, the societal cost of a murder to society is estimated in various studies, but the National Institute of Health estimates it to be about $9 million or so with a range of "$4,144,677 to $11,350,687"[2]. I've seen another study pinning the number at $17.2 million.

Thus to make the death penalty worth it, economically, we only need to accept that the each execution deters or prevents (as a dead murderer can no longer kill), oh, at most 1/6th of a murder ($4.4 million/ $.7 million) and using the average . Using the actual cost assumption of $9 million, each execution needs only to deter/prevent about 1/13th of a murder to be worth it. Given some (admittedly dubious) studies that argue each execution deters several murders, and the logic that people follow their incentives, that's a bargain I'll take.

1. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Just to be fair, the study includes the cost to the victim in it's estimation of total cost by estimating the "value" of the average statistical life. Obviously this method is not without it's flaws as life is intangible, but it's the best we have to go off of in calculating the actual cost to society. We absolutely should care about the victim when looking at these things.

Also of note is that the study does not attempt to measure the cost of distress caused to the victims loved ones which, I'm sure, would be immense.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

Its not, however, irrelevant to the state carrying out the justice. And for all of the extra cost of the death penalty with no benefit taking the cheap route is certainly an incentive to lose the penalty.


-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 3:32:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 9:39:56 AM, Haroush wrote:
There is no evidence keeping people in prison helps them become better people in society either.

While it's true that keeping people in an average american prison won't make them better persons. However we need to surpass the idea that prisons should be there to punish people in the hardest way possible. Remember all criminals were innocent babies like you and me once. What changed them into becoming monsters was obviously their environment. So it's not fair to kill them: they didn't choose their parents, their neighborhood and their social status. So in the end it's only fair that we give criminals a second chance.
Then you said that there's no evidence that rehabilitating them works... Well think again , in countries (like Switzerland for example), recidivism rates are very low thanks to these rehab programs. In America society tries either to kill or to punish people really hard and the results are really disappointing. So I'd say your method doesn't work.

Also, if our president can spend millions of dollars on a website that doesn't work, why can't we spend money on getting these criminals the death penalty. At least if you get rid of people who have no worth in society, people will not have to pay unnecessary taxes for these prisoners who have no worth in society.

Lastly, there is only a small percentage around 2-5% that are innocent who get the death penalty (closer to 2%). The point is the system is fair and it works.

By the way, the average cost per prisoner per year is $31,286.

Then if we think about the cost in total when we multiply the cost by the number of prisoners, it looks something like this..

1,571,013 multiplied by the cost is $49,150,712,718! Really?!?

And we shouldn't use the death penalty to get rid of prisoners who don't want to do better and become a part of society???

Screw that! We don't have the money as a nation to keep feeding some of these no good pieces of crap!

And if the death penalty were to be abolished, well then prisoners shouldn't have no televisions to watch. Nor any other types of entertainment. It's called prison for a reason. It's not a rehabilitation center.

Side Note: They shouldn't be using these prisoners as guinea pigs to gain a better understanding of psychiatric medications either!

If this was the case then we would have no need for prisons. Furthermore, prisoners shouldn't be taking jobs from citizens who are productive parts of society.

It's not right prisoners have all these programs set up for them, but yet your average American is treated like dirt by their own government!

This is what we call a nanny state and this is all I have to say about that.
Haroush
Posts: 1,329
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 4:19:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 3:32:31 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/4/2014 9:39:56 AM, Haroush wrote:
There is no evidence keeping people in prison helps them become better people in society either.

While it's true that keeping people in an average american prison won't make them better persons. However we need to surpass the idea that prisons should be there to punish people in the hardest way possible. Remember all criminals were innocent babies like you and me once. What changed them into becoming monsters was obviously their environment. So it's not fair to kill them: they didn't choose their parents, their neighborhood and their social status. So in the end it's only fair that we give criminals a second chance.
Then you said that there's no evidence that rehabilitating them works... Well think again , in countries (like Switzerland for example), recidivism rates are very low thanks to these rehab programs. In America society tries either to kill or to punish people really hard and the results are really disappointing. So I'd say your method doesn't work.

I didn't say there was no evidence rehabilitating prisoners works, but what I will say when it comes to rehabilitating is A.) These services tend to be overused on felons who don't want to be a productive part of society. B.) Many of the prisoners who do complete these programs, tend to become repeat offenders. Meaning despite the
efforts of government officials, these ex-cons tend to become repeat felony offenders.
C.) I think some crimes should be frowned upon much more than others.

With all of this said, I believe rehabilitation services and the DP should work hand in hand. Meaning give the prisoners the option of A.) You can either work with us to help make you a productive part of society or B.) You can take the Electric chair or Lethal Injection.

They can have the choice of either one.

By the way, many of the prisoners who are eligible for the DP admit they deserve the DP.

Also, if our president can spend millions of dollars on a website that doesn't work, why can't we spend money on getting these criminals the death penalty. At least if you get rid of people who have no worth in society, people will not have to pay unnecessary taxes for these prisoners who have no worth in society.

Lastly, there is only a small percentage around 2-5% that are innocent who get the death penalty (closer to 2%). The point is the system is fair and it works.

By the way, the average cost per prisoner per year is $31,286.

Then if we think about the cost in total when we multiply the cost by the number of prisoners, it looks something like this..

1,571,013 multiplied by the cost is $49,150,712,718! Really?!?

And we shouldn't use the death penalty to get rid of prisoners who don't want to do better and become a part of society???

Screw that! We don't have the money as a nation to keep feeding some of these no good pieces of crap!

And if the death penalty were to be abolished, well then prisoners shouldn't have no televisions to watch. Nor any other types of entertainment. It's called prison for a reason. It's not a rehabilitation center.

Side Note: They shouldn't be using these prisoners as guinea pigs to gain a better understanding of psychiatric medications either!

If this was the case then we would have no need for prisons. Furthermore, prisoners shouldn't be taking jobs from citizens who are productive parts of society.

It's not right prisoners have all these programs set up for them, but yet your average American is treated like dirt by their own government!

This is what we call a nanny state and this is all I have to say about that.
Intrepidity
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2014 4:56:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Here's the thing with the death penalty:

There is no evidence that implies a clear correlation-causation relationship between more executions and a lower crime rate. For those of you who find correlations, I advise you to look up the economic growth rate in that area over the period of time that you are looking at- chances are, there was a spike in economic growth that coincided with the introduction of the DP. The fact of the matter is that economic livelihood, stability, and the ability to place food in your or your family's stomach are much more effective indicators of crime rates than the death penalty.

So the question boils down to a moral conundrum: is it ethical to take a life in exchange for the taking of a life? This is fundamentally answered through personal philosophy and grounding in moral belief, but the one problem I have with it is arbitrary designation- what crimes are wort of execution? Murder? Rape? Because in some cultures, modern and historical, insulting the monarch was a matter of life and death. If you disagree with this, why are their designations objectively more valid than your own?
Grayscale
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 2:20:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way
-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent
-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)
-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed
-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society
-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Well lets go in order
-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

The death penalty was not an institution to demonstrate morality. The fact of the matter is that violent crime is concentrated in a very small segment of society which reenact their violence over and over again. The death penalty is effectively a way to remove destabilizing and violent forces from society.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

This is false, and I think I've actually replied to one of your official debates on this on the comment section, so I'll just repeat what I wrote there.

For those that claim there isn't any evidence obviously haven't researched the topic. There are items which affect the outcome though, media exposure, swiftness, and form of execution, etc. I"d recommend everyone to read the following peer reviewed journals. Estimates of the deterrent effect of alternative execution methods in the United States: 1978"2000 by Zimmerman, P. R.; Publicized executions and homicide, 1950-1980 by Stack Steven; Prison conditions, capital punishment and deterrence by Katz, L.; Levitt, S. D.; Shustorovich, E. Getting off death row: Commuted sentences and the deterrent effect of capital punishment by Mocan, H. Naci; Gittings, R. Kaj

In Capital punishment, the deterrence is temporary but present, through empirical studies, it was found that the reach of deterrence only covered the same type of crimes for which the capital sentences were levied against. Also the effects of deterrence lasted for 2 to 3 months, which crime would rise back up to normal levels.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

The numbers keep on changing but in the reverse scenario, murderers who don't get the death penalty have a recividicm rate of 21-27% within the study. This also doesn't even factor in the dark figure of crime.
http://nj.gov...

So if we are talking about total lives protected, 1/5-1/3 compared to 1/25.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

Entirely due to appeals, but this actually isn't consistently true either and is closer to the exception than the rule. The only reason why this is the case for states like California is because people stay on death row for 20-30+ years, whereas in Texas its much sorter and thus much cheaper. So essentially it depends on how enthusiatic the states leadership is in enforcing it, as it stands California's leaders don't like executing people so are more inclined to make the system fallible.

--If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

OK I would really love to see your source (I honestly due like reading them, all I need is the title, author, and date, I can do the rest), because its not that straight forward. First there is the automatic Direct Appeal which, then the Post Conviction Appeal, then Habeas Corpus. How is your study quantifying these numbers? On what is the assume changes made which would incur that number?

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

This is a repeat of your first post, thus look there

--Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

False, majorly, first let me get the low hanging fruit, this would also include non EU countries which don't have the death penalty, and the majority of them have higher crime rates than the US. I don't think you'd find that too surprising so let me touch on the next one

Now for the shocker, the EU has a HIGHER crime and violent crime than the United States. The US has the highest murder rate, which is one category of violent crime, but the EU has much more violent crime overall, Sweden being the rape capital of the West no less.
http://dev3.cepr.org...

So really, you pulled this out of thin air. I can quote you more studies and more articles if you feel like discussing the matter.
numberwang
Posts: 1,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 4:06:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/5/2014 2:20:34 AM, Grayscale wrote:

Well lets go in order
-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

The death penalty was not an institution to demonstrate morality. The fact of the matter is that violent crime is concentrated in a very small segment of society which reenact their violence over and over again. The death penalty is effectively a way to remove destabilizing and violent forces from society.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

This is false, and I think I've actually replied to one of your official debates on this on the comment section, so I'll just repeat what I wrote there.

For those that claim there isn't any evidence obviously haven't researched the topic. There are items which affect the outcome though, media exposure, swiftness, and form of execution, etc. I"d recommend everyone to read the following peer reviewed journals. Estimates of the deterrent effect of alternative execution methods in the United States: 1978"2000 by Zimmerman, P. R.; Publicized executions and homicide, 1950-1980 by Stack Steven; Prison conditions, capital punishment and deterrence by Katz, L.; Levitt, S. D.; Shustorovich, E. Getting off death row: Commuted sentences and the deterrent effect of capital punishment by Mocan, H. Naci; Gittings, R. Kaj

In Capital punishment, the deterrence is temporary but present, through empirical studies, it was found that the reach of deterrence only covered the same type of crimes for which the capital sentences were levied against. Also the effects of deterrence lasted for 2 to 3 months, which crime would rise back up to normal levels.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

The numbers keep on changing but in the reverse scenario, murderers who don't get the death penalty have a recividicm rate of 21-27% within the study. This also doesn't even factor in the dark figure of crime.
http://nj.gov...

So if we are talking about total lives protected, 1/5-1/3 compared to 1/25.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

Entirely due to appeals, but this actually isn't consistently true either and is closer to the exception than the rule. The only reason why this is the case for states like California is because people stay on death row for 20-30+ years, whereas in Texas its much sorter and thus much cheaper. So essentially it depends on how enthusiatic the states leadership is in enforcing it, as it stands California's leaders don't like executing people so are more inclined to make the system fallible.

Actually it isn't entirely due to appeals, prosecuting and defending death penalty costs more time and money on average for the state, significantly more in fact. And then the appeals end up costing more as well. At least that's what I last read, I may have misunderstood that these costs came as a result of appeals but I don't think so.

--If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

OK I would really love to see your source (I honestly due like reading them, all I need is the title, author, and date, I can do the rest), because its not that straight forward. First there is the automatic Direct Appeal which, then the Post Conviction Appeal, then Habeas Corpus. How is your study quantifying these numbers? On what is the assume changes made which would incur that number?

That is the same source as the 4% innocent number, and it's based on the amount of people who actually get off of death penalty sentences on appeal.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

This is a repeat of your first post, thus look there

--Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

False, majorly, first let me get the low hanging fruit, this would also include non EU countries which don't have the death penalty, and the majority of them have higher crime rates than the US. I don't think you'd find that too surprising so let me touch on the next one

Now for the shocker, the EU has a HIGHER crime and violent crime than the United States. The US has the highest murder rate, which is one category of violent crime, but the EU has much more violent crime overall, Sweden being the rape capital of the West no less.

The death penalty is only really given for murder, so isn't that what it is supposed to deter? It can be given for other crimes, but it is applied almost exclusively for murder in the US currently, right? So the deterrence of other crime is kind of irrelevant. No one is getting executed for mugging or beating someone up.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 6:52:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 3:32:31 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/4/2014 9:39:56 AM, Haroush wrote:
There is no evidence keeping people in prison helps them become better people in society either.

While it's true that keeping people in an average american prison won't make them better persons. However we need to surpass the idea that prisons should be there to punish people in the hardest way possible. Remember all criminals were innocent babies like you and me once. What changed them into becoming monsters was obviously their environment.....

Tell that to the great many pedophiles in prison who would voluntary submit to castration if it meant a chance to live prison free, Cause that's the way they are from birth. Prisons surprisingly don't give a crap about punishment (at least the Federal ones.) All they want is compliance and no fighting behind bars with as little cost possible.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 11:41:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/4/2014 6:30:56 AM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.

Sorry to tell you that those statistics aren't made up at all, you can check them out here:
http://www.pnas.org...

Actually, that study is extremely speculative and flawed. It is quite simple. They use overall exonerations as their metric, however, it does not explain why they were exonerated. Technicalities, perhaps? The fact is, if this is taken into account, I suspect the overall innocents executed would be much smaller. Using data from anti death penalty groups, the amount executed is generally far less than one percent. And as the Death penalty, as demonstrated by the best research in the area, deters murder I think the overall benefit from the death penalty outweighs any possible downsides.


As to the cost you should check the website from the "proposition 34" initiative (that sadly failed):
http://www.safecalifornia.org...

As thett3 rightly points out, the death penalty only need deter 1/6 of a murder to overturn that conclusion. In fact, I have written extensively on the cost topic. See here: http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com...

Some quotes from my article:

"the studies in the 80s are still cited by abolitionists today. GAO reports in 1989 offer solid criticism to these studies"

"Richard Dieter, the DPIC president and anti-capital punishment advocate still cites these studies when testifying before our government or in the media, yet he ignores the 1989 GAO report which refutes the numbers he continues to cite"

"Their second analysis shows the DP costing 780,000 dollars ... LWOP costs 593,000 dollars per case. When Sorensen and Pilgrim accounted for plea-bargains, 264,000 dollars is saved ... Regardless, the two most comprehensive studies show the DP and LWOP are in the same ballpark range in cost"

"a 50% execution success rate leads to equal costs"

"After amassing the data, we see the death penalty is as cost efficient, though likely more cost efficient, then equivalent LWOP cases."
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 11:58:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

. :D

Actually, the vast majority of recent research actually shows a strong deterrent effect. Back in the 70s, most research was done by criminologists using extremely simple techniques. This outlook was changed when Issac Ehrlich (sp?) wrote a study which demonstrated a strong deterrent effect. Although his research was criticized, he responded to each criticism, each paper, and in every way in and out defended his original study. Stephen Layson in 1985 confirmed these results, as well as Cloninger 1992. IN fact, according to a list by the CJLF, 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, and 2 are inconclusive (http://www.cjlf.org...).

In Massachusetts, when the DP was abolished, murder spiked and on average remained higher than it did before the law was struck down (http://www.debate.org...)

Crime fell sharply in New York when the death penalty was re-instituted (http://www.debate.org...)

Accounting for variables including population, drug use, etc, crime is higher in states without the death penalty (http://www.debate.org...)

The more executions, the fewer homicides per 100,000 people (http://www.debate.org...)
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Intrepidity
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2014 2:02:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/5/2014 11:58:15 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

. :D

Actually, the vast majority of recent research actually shows a strong deterrent effect. Back in the 70s, most research was done by criminologists using extremely simple techniques. This outlook was changed when Issac Ehrlich (sp?) wrote a study which demonstrated a strong deterrent effect. Although his research was criticized, he responded to each criticism, each paper, and in every way in and out defended his original study. Stephen Layson in 1985 confirmed these results, as well as Cloninger 1992. IN fact, according to a list by the CJLF, 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, and 2 are inconclusive (http://www.cjlf.org...).

In Massachusetts, when the DP was abolished, murder spiked and on average remained higher than it did before the law was struck down (http://www.debate.org...)

Crime fell sharply in New York when the death penalty was re-instituted (http://www.debate.org...)

Accounting for variables including population, drug use, etc, crime is higher in states without the death penalty (http://www.debate.org...)

The more executions, the fewer homicides per 100,000 people (http://www.debate.org...)

Round 3, con side.

http://www.debate.org...
W1ll1ph0n3
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/6/2014 12:58:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/5/2014 11:58:15 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

. :D

Actually, the vast majority of recent research actually shows a strong deterrent effect. Back in the 70s, most research was done by criminologists using extremely simple techniques. This outlook was changed when Issac Ehrlich (sp?) wrote a study which demonstrated a strong deterrent effect. Although his research was criticized, he responded to each criticism, each paper, and in every way in and out defended his original study. Stephen Layson in 1985 confirmed these results, as well as Cloninger 1992. IN fact, according to a list by the CJLF, 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, and 2 are inconclusive (http://www.cjlf.org...).

In Massachusetts, when the DP was abolished, murder spiked and on average remained higher than it did before the law was struck down (http://www.debate.org...)

Crime fell sharply in New York when the death penalty was re-instituted (http://www.debate.org...)

Accounting for variables including population, drug use, etc, crime is higher in states without the death penalty (http://www.debate.org...)

The more executions, the fewer homicides per 100,000 people (http://www.debate.org...)

Sorry to tell you that murder rates are lower in states who have abolished it than in states that use the death penalty :
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
http://www.amnestyusa.org...
And again I can tell you about the murder rates in most European countries: waay lower than in the US: http://www.civitas.org.uk...

Then you cited drug use. Are you really proposing the death penalty for drug use? Or did I misinterpreted that?
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2014 11:23:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/6/2014 12:58:22 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
At 7/5/2014 11:58:15 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

. :D

Actually, the vast majority of recent research actually shows a strong deterrent effect. Back in the 70s, most research was done by criminologists using extremely simple techniques. This outlook was changed when Issac Ehrlich (sp?) wrote a study which demonstrated a strong deterrent effect. Although his research was criticized, he responded to each criticism, each paper, and in every way in and out defended his original study. Stephen Layson in 1985 confirmed these results, as well as Cloninger 1992. IN fact, according to a list by the CJLF, 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, and 2 are inconclusive (http://www.cjlf.org...).

In Massachusetts, when the DP was abolished, murder spiked and on average remained higher than it did before the law was struck down (http://www.debate.org...)

Crime fell sharply in New York when the death penalty was re-instituted (http://www.debate.org...)

Accounting for variables including population, drug use, etc, crime is higher in states without the death penalty (http://www.debate.org...)

The more executions, the fewer homicides per 100,000 people (http://www.debate.org...)

Sorry to tell you that murder rates are lower in states who have abolished it than in states that use the death penalty :
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
http://www.amnestyusa.org...

Again, those numbers fail to take into account other variables. The states without the death penalty had lower crime rates BEFORE they abolished it (see, eg, Lott 2007). So really, saying they have lower crime rates is true, HOWEVER, they have lower crime rates for reasons OTHER THAN the death penalty. Reasons include the amount of poverty, population, population density, drug use, police officers, arrest rates, gangs, and the amount of minorities (generally, minorities commit more crime due to reasons of poverty). When this is accounted for, states with the death penalty have far lower crime rates, as demonstrated.

And again I can tell you about the murder rates in most European countries: waay lower than in the US: http://www.civitas.org.uk...

Again, irrelevant. The culture, population levels, poverty levels, demographics, justice systems, etc. all differ from the United States--which explains the difference in crime. Unless you argue the death penalty increases crime, then even assuming all the variables are accounted for, this doesn't make sense. You have to argue the DP increases crime--which really doesn't make sense. Only minor studies in non-peer reviewed journals argue this. At worst, we see people arguing no effect. And the evidence for that is underwhelming.


Then you cited drug use. Are you really proposing the death penalty for drug use? Or did I misinterpreted that?

Yeah... I said that when drug use is accounted for, among other variables, the crime difference between the states vanishes--and often shows the DP states have lower crime.

The DP for other crimes, such as rape, would increase crime. As the rapist would want to reduce the chance of being caught, he would often murder the victim (no witness) and hide the body. Therefore, the death penalty should only be used for murderers, as the heinous crime of rape (which morally I would execute) should not be executed for practical reasons.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2014 11:33:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/5/2014 2:02:41 PM, Intrepidity wrote:
At 7/5/2014 11:58:15 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal
-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

. :D

Actually, the vast majority of recent research actually shows a strong deterrent effect. Back in the 70s, most research was done by criminologists using extremely simple techniques. This outlook was changed when Issac Ehrlich (sp?) wrote a study which demonstrated a strong deterrent effect. Although his research was criticized, he responded to each criticism, each paper, and in every way in and out defended his original study. Stephen Layson in 1985 confirmed these results, as well as Cloninger 1992. IN fact, according to a list by the CJLF, 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, and 2 are inconclusive (http://www.cjlf.org...).

In Massachusetts, when the DP was abolished, murder spiked and on average remained higher than it did before the law was struck down (http://www.debate.org...)

Crime fell sharply in New York when the death penalty was re-instituted (http://www.debate.org...)

Accounting for variables including population, drug use, etc, crime is higher in states without the death penalty (http://www.debate.org...)

The more executions, the fewer homicides per 100,000 people (http://www.debate.org...)

Round 3, con side.

http://www.debate.org...

I have read it...

CON cherry picked. Unemployment actually fell from 1972 - 1975, with a spike in 1975, and it fell again in 1976. This means that increased unemployment CAN NOT explain why the crime increased in the 1972 - 1975 period (http://www.multpl.com...). I didn't cite Texas, however research which has accounted for variables has seen large drops in crime due to the death penalty.

As for Ehrlich, see PRO round 2 (http://www.debate.org...). I mean, if you read my round 2, there is no way a reasoned person could disagree that the death penalty deters crime--even if only some.

PRO cites Shepard, but MISREPRESENTS what she says. She argues that if a state has a lot of executions, or executes people faster, there is a strong deterrent effect. In states where executions are more lax, rare, and slow, there is no effect or a slight increase in crime. Her research does NOT say we should stop executing, or that it has no effect, it says that we should execute a lot MORE people (http://www.csmonitor.com...).

As for innocents, see my debate round 2.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2014 2:04:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

I don't think many would say that the example you give is morally equivalent. What about this example? The state putting an innocent accused to death compared to a violent killing of a child?

I have little appreciation for the collateral damage argument.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
YYW
Posts: 36,426
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2014 2:08:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

Indeed, the death penalty makes a murderer of the state. The reason people like it is because it makes them feel better. The DP is eye-for-an-eye style retribution, which appeals to those of us who want murderers to be murdered, even though very few death penalty advocates would agree that execution is murder.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

Well, there is some evidence but it's not convincing... and even if it does deter crime, I can think of better deterrents: like a life at a penal labor colony. That's one of the very few things the Russians have done correctly.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a fairly compelling reason, too.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I'm familiar with the stats on that, and you're right that because of appeals, the death penalty tends to be more expensive than life in prison. But, the appeals process itself is what's so expensive, and that's separate from execution.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Now that's interesting, and I didn't know that.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

Of course, and it's a sign of societal moral weakness that the death penalty still exists. The reasons that people support it also reduce to a combination of fear and resentment; which in itself doesn't mean that the DP is bad, but the reasons for supporting it are generally irrational.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Post hoc logic, unless you can isolate causality... but I would argue that the reason both that Europe has generally less crime than the US and also doesn't execute people like we do (or imprison them) is predominantly cultural.
Tsar of DDO
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2014 2:37:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/7/2014 2:04:50 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 4:43:56 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

No it doesn't. Not all killing is murder--the proposition that the state putting a violent murderer to death is the moral equivalent of killing and raping a child is absurd. I suppose you think that imprisonment is the moral equivalent of kidnapping, too?

I don't think many would say that the example you give is morally equivalent. What about this example? The state putting an innocent accused to death compared to a violent killing of a child?

I have little appreciation for the collateral damage argument.

The problem with your rebuttal is that it ignores the context of my post--maybe the risk of the state putting an innocent to death is a travesty so despicable that it outweighs the positive aspects of the death penalty. I don't agree, but that's a reasonable argument. To argue, like the OP did, that putting the guilty to death is the moral equivalent of murder is ridiculous and insulting to murder victims.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

That isn't a positive argument. I could say the same about life imprisonment.

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a statistic you literally just made up.

-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I made an interesting rebuttal to this argument in my debate with Dtaylor. Basically, there are studies that show that the average murder costs society upwards 17 million. The cost of an execution over life imprisoment in states that actually execute is 500,000 using numbers very generous to your side. So in order to come out on too economically, we only need to stop or deter 1 murder for every 34 executions.

Moreover cost is irrelevant to justice.

-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Another made up statistic. If this is true, however, this begs the question as to how many innocents are left to die in prison. Innocents who are convicted are much better off sentenced to die where they have a chance to prove their innocence than sentenced to life improsonment where the case will never be looked at again. The statistics bear this out.

-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

That's ridiculous. Punishment is inherently reactionary.

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Apples and oranges.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2014 11:29:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/7/2014 2:08:24 PM, YYW wrote:
At 7/3/2014 3:46:54 PM, W1ll1ph0n3 wrote:
I think that the Death Penalty should be abolished for these reasons:

-The Death Penalty diminishes society to the same moral level as the criminal

Indeed, the death penalty makes a murderer of the state. The reason people like it is because it makes them feel better. The DP is eye-for-an-eye style retribution, which appeals to those of us who want murderers to be murdered, even though very few death penalty advocates would agree that execution is murder.

-There is absolutely no evidence that it deters crime in any way

Well, there is some evidence but it's not convincing... and even if it does deter crime, I can think of better deterrents: like a life at a penal labor colony. That's one of the very few things the Russians have done correctly.


Actually it is pretty convincing. The only decent rebuttal I have seen against DP research was from the NRC, and even then they ignored most of the peer-reviewed research. They ignored 8 studies showing the death penalty deterred crime, and 1 that said it had little effect. They also ignored one non-peer reviewed study which shows a deterrent effect, and they ignore the countless problems with studies claiming there is no effect (http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org...).

I bet a penal colony and slave labor would deter crime, but it would be considered cruel and unusual punishment :/

-Out 100 executed prisoners, 4 are likely to be innocent

That's a fairly compelling reason, too.

I already refuted the study in another post, but with more research I found another flaw. The paper confuses the terms false conviction and exoneration many times, and as economist John Lott explains, "while the rate of overturned cases for any reason is indeed higher in death-penalty cases simply because so much effort is put into appeals, neither of these terms implies the defendant was innocent." http://www.nationalreview.com...


-The Death Penalty costs more than life imprisonment (mainly due to the appeals)

I'm familiar with the stats on that, and you're right that because of appeals, the death penalty tends to be more expensive than life in prison. But, the appeals process itself is what's so expensive, and that's separate from execution.

Naw man, the numbers that say the DP is more expensive is wack. See what Thett and I have already said on this forum.


-If prisoners didn't have those appeals, then 30 out of a hundred would be wrongfully executed

Now that's interesting, and I didn't know that.

He never cited that, plus he has to prove those 30 would actually be innocent or if it would be on a technicality (the vast majority of exonerations are due to technicalities, generally not true innocence). Further, Virginia has the least strict appeals process, and no innocents to my knowledge have been executed there.


-The Death Penalty promotes revenge and a bloodthirsty society

Of course, and it's a sign of societal moral weakness that the death penalty still exists. The reasons that people support it also reduce to a combination of fear and resentment; which in itself doesn't mean that the DP is bad, but the reasons for supporting it are generally irrational.


I dont do philosophy mumbo jumbo :P

I like numbers, I like to see what happens after a law is passed, not whether or not it is moral XD

-Most countries who have abolished it have waaaay lower crime rates than the US

Post hoc logic, unless you can isolate causality... but I would argue that the reason both that Europe has generally less crime than the US and also doesn't execute people like we do (or imprison them) is predominantly cultural.

^
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross