CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should the Death Penalty be completely outlawed in the United States
In The US there are currently 32 states with the death penalty and the average cost a a death penality case is 2.4 Million dollars. The current number of people on death row is 3261 and there has only been 1226 excutions since 1976. It cost roughly 1 billion dollars per year to hose these inmates. Is all that money worth keeping the death Penality or should it be completly abolished.
Yes, death penalty is not a qualified punishment for a crime.
I mean isn't the idea of punishment that you learn a lesson? You did something bad, you get punished and you learn that you will not do that again, right?
What would you rather choose - living in a dirty disgusting prison in Thailand for life, or just being killed.
My choice? Why live a whole life in a prison knowing that I will never get out? I would rather just die. So by killing the criminal you're just doing him a favor. Put him/her in a hard core prison where they can slowly rot to death, and after they die they can enter the real hell.
I mean isn't the idea of punishment that you learn a lesson? You did something bad, you get punished and you learn that you will not do that again, right?
I agree with you, whats the point of being punished if you don't learn from it.
My choice? Why live a whole life in a prison knowing that I will never get out? I would rather just die. So by killing the criminal you're just doing him a favor. Put him/her in a hard core prison where they can slowly rot to death, and after they die they can enter the real hell.
I thought you were agnostic anyways that's exactly what I said :D I agree with you 100% :D
I find the death penalty to be quite hypocritical. Not to mention that's a lot of money for it and finally what's the point of the death penalty when we can just send imitates to prison for life. Its a lot worse punishment then the death penalty.
To Europeans this is an absolute no brainer. No one has the right to take away take away a European's right to life including the state (European Convention on Human Rights, Article 2 and Protocol 5). Its just an obviously immoral thing to do. I think the USA needs to civilise itself.
No one has the right to take away take away a European's right to life including the state (European Convention on Human Rights, Article 2 and Protocol 5). Its just an obviously immoral thing to do. I think the USA needs to civilise itself.
While I don't want to bring the subject of abortions since it has nothing to do with this debate, I sort of agree with you. Abortions are wrong but sometimes there not. It depends on who the mother is and the fetus. Abortions should only be a last resort.
As you are aware all nations make a distinction between the rights of a fetus and that of a born person. No where in the world, that I know of, has the exactly the same right to life for both born and unborn persons. The case law clearly excludes fetuses from the right to life
I can't speak to the laws of other nations. However, here in the U.S. (at least) - our Constitution says that all persons have an equal right to their life and just as importantly - to the equal protections of our laws.
You are right when you say that historically, that's not been the case. Children in the womb have been and are being treated as less than equal human beings.
We've been over this time and time again USA does not say that causes have the same rights as humans. Abortion is legal and so is the mother poisoning the fetus or doing whatever else she wants with it. You may be trying to change it but I was talking about how the law is at the moment.
USA does not say that causes have the same rights as humans.
What does that mean and how does it address anything I posted?
A child in the womb is a human being. All human beings (legal definition) are persons. All persons according to our Constitution - have an equal right to the protections of our laws.
What part of that is confusing to you?
Abortion is legal and so is the mother poisoning the fetus or doing whatever else she wants with it.
This is completely untrue.
We have women in prison for poisoning their prenatal children, already. Women can not sell their children in the womb, embryo's, IVF laws, etc.
You seem to be more and more oblivious to anything that proves against your assertions, Atrag.
You have a fairly good mind.... so why aren't you do any research before you make some of these claims you are making?
'causes' was supposed to read fetus. I was typing on my phone with autocorrect.
A child in the womb is a human being. All human beings (legal definition) are persons. All persons according to our Constitution - have an equal right to the protections of our laws.
What part of that is confusing to you?
If law worked that way then no one would ever have to study it. All they'd have to do is have a concise dictionary with them while reading the law. You know full well that the words persons and human beings and universial protection can all be interpreted in different ways. They are not interpreted to do justice to the dictionary but rather in the persuance of more legitimate aims of law (what they actually are I'm not going to speculate here).
We have women in prison for poisoning their prenatal children, already. Women can not sell their children in the womb, embryo's, IVF laws, etc.
Women are in prison for drinking alcohol in the USA? For causing feotal alcohol syndrome for example? Tbh I have no particular interest in USA law. Every time I hear about it it just reminds me that in the USA judges are just politicians show boating for the masses. It actually really scares me.
Im British but live in Spain. Yes. But people can make mistakes and errors of judgement and not be sent to jail for it. Its absolutely unthinkable to sentence an alcoholic to jail for drinking that caused harm to her fetus here. I think jta different for you because you see a fetus as equal an adult. But most people don't and its hard to understand why a court would act with such little mercy.
Yes I am completely against the death penalty. Their are much more cons then pros. In regards to the price thing, here is a little stat for ya. The death penalty cost Florida 15 billion dollars in one year, a few years ago.
ya, but no matter what the reason, it is still money wasted. I would rather them just get rid of the death penalty all together. Anything that has to do with the criminal justice system in the U.S is terribly slow.
Ok, so if they cut out some of the process and make some changes it will be cheaper. However, right now the death penalty costs much more then life w/o parole.
Yes, and that would also make it a cheaper alternative to imprisonment.
The biggest argument (or maybe strongest) against the Death Penalty is that it's more costly than imprisonment, yet the reason it is at this moment, is because they are adding the cost of the injection, with the cost of the years of imprisonment, and the cost of extra lawyers, and extra investigations when all they really need to do is double check to make sure the person is supposed to be killed, then do it. If they are in prison they most likely did it, and imprisoning them for 50 years only to either kill them or release them won't really make a difference, they basically lost their life in waiting.
If someone came into a school, killed every man, woman, and child in the building, killed 3 police officers, and then was captured alive, who the FUCK would NOT want that person dead?
Making them spend the rest of their life in a grotty prison where they'll likely be beaten by other inmates is a much harsher punishment than a quick and relatively painless death.
