Inhumane; Lower-Class Heavy; Economic Disaster; No Overpopulation; No Catharsis A purge of any sort would be inhumane, as it would most significantly affect the lower-class. The lower-class isn't able to afford protection, including firearms and shelter. A purge would have the most poignant affect on the most vulnerable.
Some argue that the economy would be improved due to a decline in welfare spending. However, the money that would need to be spent on infrastructure after a purge would be astronomical. Imagine the bridges, roads, and government buildings that would need repair.
Overpopulation is not an issue. Places that are overpopulated are that way because people choose to live that way. There are millions of acres of inhabitable land where one can move should he or she have a personal problem with overcrowding.
A common argument is that a purge would be cathartic, allowing people to release negative feelings by means of murder, theft, and rape. This, they argue, would result in a decrease in crime rates. However, I think I'm missing something here. Maybe it's just me, but allowing murder doesn't seem like it would prevent murder. Why would telling society it's acceptable to steal result in less theft? Permitting something always makes it seem more acceptable, which leads people to feel less remorse at crime and thus more inclined to commit it.
My personal objection to a purge is entirely moral and due to humaneness. However, I included objective arguments so that I may persuade those who don't have moral convictions similar to mine.