Should the death penalty be allowed?
yes, it should
Side Score: 23
|
 |
No, it shouldn't
Side Score: 17
|
|
|
|
|
I read that once upon a time in the old wild west horse thieves were hanged, but as one law officer put it, not for stealing horses, but to stop people from stealing horses. If the death penalty was imposed for grand theft auto I'm sure the instances of this crime would plummet. The death penalty should be vigorously prescribed for such crimes as willful murder, treason, and illegal entry into the U.S. Illegal immigrants could be incinerated with their ashes used as fertilizer, thus off setting the high energy costs of their cremation. Hallelujah, brother, hallelujah. Side: yes, it should
there are heneious and barbaric crimes like rape, minors assaulted, certain cold blooded murders carried out by individuals under complete awareness. carried out when they are in complete controll of their lust. if someone kills out od rage or self defence its worth giving them a second chance to correct their character, but disgusting souls with sick minds like this who cannot see beyond a body, whether its minor or whatever, are deadly dangerous. you cant rectify such behaviors. leaving them alive is wasting resources on them. and most most importantly, if you dont execute them, it sets a tremedously wrong example for other pervert minds. the only way we can deter their behaviour/actions by little gravity is showing them what happens when they do, what they want to do. not hanging such criminals is a crime we are doing. forget about the human rights activists, as they forget about the word 'human' in their own profiles. they are suppose to only fight for humans not animals in human bodies. Side: yes, it should
Execution as a method of deterrence has long since be shown to be false. The are numerous studies that show no link whatsoever between states that use capital punishment and those states that don't. Even when some states have abolished the death penalty the murder rate has decreased. There is also a train of thought that says that if you had committed the worst crimes, execution is actually more merciful than a life behind bars. Sure, you may experience pain for a few minutes, but compared to a lifetime of imprisonment and the memories of what you have done, I would say you are letting them off too easily! Side: No, it shouldn't
i actually agree with your point - "but compared to a lifetime of imprisonment and the memories of what you have done, I would say you are letting them off too easily!" but there are two things. one, i believe it's waste of resources on keeping them alive: food, medicine, infrastructure, bloody their minimum rights in jail. cause they dont get executed immediately. i guess they do get enough time to undergo remorse, if at all possible. second, although states who abolished death penalty, witnessed descent in crime, its because of better law and order. so i think that's the solution to decrease crime, but to instill fear towards the law and order, death penalty will make it happen. i believe it's important to because any human being will fear death more than living in any condition. Side: yes, it should
2
points
No one questions their right to life. It isn't really about that. It's about whether or not they are receiving an appropriate punishment. I would say a quick execution isn't enough of a punishment for murder! Let them sit behind bars for the rest of their lives. Side: No, it shouldn't
1
point
|
3
points
So, you are saying people should be punished because they did something like kill someone else, right? But now you want to kill them? Then why shouldn't the executioner also be killed? And it would just be a never ending circle of people killing and then being killed. Side: No, it shouldn't
1
point
Here's a good legal based argument. Premise one: The death penalty serves to punish the guilty and deter them and others from doing the same crime. Premise 2: the 8th amendment protects from cruel and unusual punishment. Premise 3: a punishment that is unnecessary is considered unusual. Premise 4: there is no evidence showing that the death penalty deters people from doing crime more than life imprisonment. Premise 5: because there's no evidence of this the death penalty is unnecessary Premise 6: because it is unnecessary it is considered unusual. Premise 7: because it is unusual it is a violation of the 8th amendment. Side: No, it shouldn't
Was the victim of the murderer given a choice to live or die ? Do tell what amendment protected the victim of the murderer ? Did the victim have protection from cruel and unusual punishment dealt out by the murderer ? Not very surprising to see Leftist supporting criminals no wonder Hillary wants felons to vote and you lend that support as is shown. Side: yes, it should
1
point
Was the victim of the murderer given a choice to live or die? How is that relevant? Do tell what amendment protected the victim of the murderer? Again, highly irrelevant. Did the victim have protection from cruel and unusual punishment dealt out by the murderer? No? What the fuck is the point of this nonsense line of reasoning? Their protection is the police and their right to self defense and their 2nd amendment rights to own a gun i guess. The specific fucking point of the 8th amendment is to protect offenders from cruel and unusual punishment. Thats what the basis of this argument is. Pointing out that theres no 8th amendment for non-offenders is utterly pointless. Not very surprising to see Leftist supporting criminals no wonder Hillary wants felons to vote and you lend that support as is show Not very surprising how a right winger who supposedly beats off to the constitution is so quick to write off pieces of it when they dont support their opinions. Side: No, it shouldn't
No the victim was killed without consent but we don't want to be like the murderer. . Murderers didn't follow the law yet we don't want to do what the murderer does. . No, the victim didn't have protection while being killed but if we do the same to them we're not far away from being violent, cruel and inhumane as they are. Side: No, it shouldn't
Premise 6 is not true. Just because it isn't necessary doesn't make it unusual. You have only shown the death penalty deters people as much as life imprisonment. The death penalty does what it is supposed to do and shouldn't be considered unusual just because something else can do the same thing. Side: yes, it should
2
points
The death penalty is FAR more severe than life imprisonment. If you cant prove that the purpose of the punishment is better served via death than life in prison then giving the death penalty is unjustifiable. Its unnecessary to kill someone where you cant prove that that is a more appropriate for of punishment than life in prison. Side: No, it shouldn't
Does America really want to position itself alongside such illustrious company as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, China in being a nation that still thinks that capital punishment is an appropriate measure? Countless studies have shown that within democracies, the level of support for the death penalty is inversely proportionate to the education of the voters. To me, this speaks volumes about the type of punishment we are seeking, and those people who can see capital punishment for what it really is recognize this; the death penalty is revenge, not punishment. Taking to one side the issues over the cost of executions, and of the issues with innocents being falsely sentenced to death, let me focus on just one issue... the morality of state approved execution. If one child hits the other, we don't also the injured party to strike back whilst we stand and watch. No more so do we condone a rapist being publicly raped. Perhaps some of you on the pro side think we should? Either way, we must separate what instinctively we feel might be 'justified' and what will be a measured and appropriate. Finally, I would like to draw the correlation between support for capital punishment and support for military action against other countries. It is my belief that one goes hand-in-hand with the other. If you condone capital punishment, chances are you support the bombing and invasion of foreign countries, as there is a causal link there; "why should we not enact justice upon the countries who harbor terrorists if we execute our own citizens who commit murder' is often the sentiment I hear. 'We need to be better than those who would seek to do us harm'. Winston Churchill, 1938. Side: No, it shouldn't
|
