Death Penalty
Personally, I never knew anyone sentenced to death by court. All I have seen from death penalties are either justice or an inhumane way of punishment. But the question lives: Is it right or wrong?
Justice!
Side Score: 17
|
 |
It isn't right.
Side Score: 18
|
|
|
|
|
Ideally, the death penalty would be a good way of disposing of the worse kinds of criminals. I have no problem with killing a man who is a child rapist or a ruthless murderer; my problem comes more from how we get these convictions in the first place. Trials are about getting the jury to say "guilty" or "not guilty". They're not truly about presenting hard, practically irrefutable evidence. If a conviction is made on solid evidence, kill him. But if it's made on speculation... well, it shouldn't be a conviction in the first place. Side: Justice!
1
point
1
point
We can dispose of the worst kinds of criminals the way we get rid of other criminals. By putting them in prison. The worst kinds of criminals would obviously be put away for life. The government doesn't have the right to take away someone's life, even in the case of murder. Side: It isn't right.
Well, according to the constitution, the government at least has a right to take away someone's life if they commit treason. But that's if you want to get into the whole "government doesn't have a right" thing. But no, you're not disposing of someone by putting them in prison. You are feeding them, paying for their medicare, providing them with entertainment, etc. As well, giving them a chance for appeal and escape... and to kill other people in prison. No, as long as they're alive they're still a problem. Side: Justice!
2
points
it has been proven time and again prisons don't rehabilitate, keeping someone in prision for their entire life in prision is less human than the death penalty. Also I also don't feel Society should have to foot the bill for these worst of the worst offenders. However, leaving these guys on death row for 10 plus years is another form of cruelty at great cost as well. It should be noted that people don't get the death penalty, from 1 bad unjust trial. Side: Justice!
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
|
6
points
It's completely abhorrent, in every scenario. The state doesn't have the right to take away anyone's life, regardless of their actions. They have the right to remove individuals who are dangerous and who have infringed on other people's rights and thus broken the social contract, but the removal does not include the robbing of their life. It's uncivilized and barbaric and appeals to people's base desires for revenge, not justice. Side: It isn't right.
3
points
My main concern with the death penalty generally involves the criminals family. If my daughter killed someone, I wouldn't like her, I'd be ashamed and I'd feel like I failed as a parent. But I'd still love her. How is it fair to destroy the criminals family? They did not commit the crime and they're distraught enough with the fact their loved one committed a crime, without having to face their death too. I'm not saying these crimes are right but that's what prison is for. Side: It isn't right.
2
points
This debate has been on here many times and many ways, but the idea of killing a man is unacceptable regardless of the crime. Prison is prison for a reason. All non violent offenders should be released while those who are violent offenders should have minimal food such as breed, meat and water with no entertainment, no medical care and minimal visitation. Unless killing is done in the direct response in the name of defense, it is wrong. Government has no problem with killing criminals, but terrified if I want to protect myself from criminals. Side: It isn't right.
death is ineluctable ,it is something that is unavoidable .we all have to experience it at some point in our lives . many will state that by capital punishment such as hanging a person for crimes against humanity such as rape or murder righteously obtains justice for the kin of diseased or the civil law in general . but let me ask you , how is it that at the point of death , the wrongdoer suddenly realizes his wrongdoing and at the point of his death (something that we have to go through once anyways ) all the pain inflected is erased , memories dissolved .. the case is closed . death as punishment is just believing that the absolute being (god) will be able to judge better . Side: It isn't right.
Even setting aside the moral debate (I don't think there's a single definitive answer to be reached there) I object to it on two grounds. 1. It's pointless. It appeals to our desire to see people be hurt (executions were public spectacles once upon a time), and it feels good, but it ultimately accomplishes nothing. Unless the criminal in question has an absurdly high chance of escaping, it doesn't really prevent additional crimes, and it won't do the victims any good. Ultimately it just encourages us to delight in the death of a fellow human being--when the government does that it's justice, but when EA does it they're terrible people? 2. It's a waste. I'm a firm believer in the human capacity to achieve great things. Every time a human life ends, untold potential is lost. I feel that our goal as a species should be to harness that potential, through education, through activism, through being engaged in the world around us, and through our treatment of prisoners. People sentenced to life in prison shouldn't languish in cells, they should be doing something to aid the society they injured. Maybe that's construction under the watchful eye of a police officer, and maybe it's writing papers on particle physics. You'll never know what a person could achieve, given the chance, if you execute them. Of course, proper security measures would need to be taken, but still. I'm reminded of a conversation with my paternal grandparents (both highly educated, highly intelligent people) about prisons. A friend of theirs has a brother in prison for multiple murders. This brother the murder needs to stay in prison or he'll hurt more people--that's who he is, and even his family recognizes it. From within his cell? He writes pamphlets on environmental activism, and has a small readership. It may not be much, but it's something, at least. That's the kind of thing I mean. Side: It isn't right.
1
point
|
