The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Should The Death Penalty Be Banned?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
jazasultan has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2017 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,089 times Debate No: 101988
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




There are many things in this society which should be banned, but the death penalty is not one of them. It is definitely the right way to go as far as capital discipline is concerned. Right now in our country, I find it outrageous that criminals think that they can get away with just about anything. In some states, including Alabama, the death penalty has helped them lower the rate of violent crimes. We need some form of capital punishment to send a message to career criminals that they will not get away with these severe crimes.

The death penalty would also make people more secure. In some countries of South America and the Far East, they have very severe penalties, including flogging, for even minor crimes. People in some areas of our nation feel they cannot walk around or step outside their houses for fear of criminals. In other countries, however, you would rarely see laws being broken because the penalties are so stern. The United States is one of the most lenient countries in the world as far as discipline. If we had the death penalty, all people would be able to use the streets even in troubled areas.

(Information taken from TeenInk)


I don't know if you know this, but US taxpayer money goes to many things, one of which is the death penalty. Not only could the government save money, but also lives.
According to, cases without the death penalty cost $740,000, while cases where the death penalty is sought cost $1.26 million. Maintaining each death row prisoner costs taxpayers $90,000 more per year than a prisoner in general population

About 5% of the time, we get the wrong guy! And you're killing people!
A definition I believe you would agree with is that our killing is usually justified as they killed first.
A- 2 wrongs don't make a right. You're just contributing to the deaths.
B- If we get the wrong guy, it is not justified and by your own above logic, anyone who non justifiably kills should, well, be killed with the death penalty. But this would mean killing millions of taxpayers!

If murder is the crime, why should murder be the penalty?
Debate Round No. 1


Some crimes are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict penalties " up to and including life sentences or even death. We have the responsibility to punish those who deserve it, but only to the degree they deserve it. Retributivists do not justify the death penalty by the general deterrence or safety it brings us. And we reject over-punishing no less than under-punishing. How obscene that aggravated murderers who behave well inside prison watch movies and play softball.Regardless of future benefits, we justify punishment because it's deserved. Let the punishment fit the crime"We should only execute those who most deserve it. And not randomly. Refine our death penalty statutes and review the sentences of everyone on death row. Release into general population those who don't really deserve to die.


We are killing by allowing this. Therefore, all taxpayers should be killed. BUT OBVIOUSLY NO. Please make rebuttals to my statements. Until you do this, considering my statement was the rebuttal to your statement, it is hard to continue that. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2


Our topic is 'Should The Death Penalty Be Banned?" not "Taxpayers should be killed" I am here you talk about how the death penalty is a deed that must be done because of the terrible crimes people are committing, not about who deserves to be killed. Thank you for understanding.


A good debating strategy is to fully follow my opponent's logic to its greatest extent. That is what I did and you have still provided no reason why it's good or why abolishing it is bad. You have not filled your burden of proof.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.