CreateDebate


Debate Info

32
14
Yes No
Debate Score:46
Arguments:41
Total Votes:48
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (24)
 
 No (13)

Debate Creator

titan82(64) pic



should lethal injection be legal.

Let your voice be heard

Yes

Side Score: 32
VS.

No

Side Score: 14
3 points

In my opinion the electric chair should still be the lead way of death sentencing...but since it has been deemed "inhumane" the next best thing is to lethally inject them.

Side: Yes
1 point

........................................................... it depends on who you're injecting

Side: Yes

Okay. For example, let's say it was Adolph Hitler during WWII

Side: Yes

The lethal injection should be kept legal and should be legal. The immoral acts that those inmates on death row have done can not be forgiven by humans. God might forgive you but if the people only knew how sinister those on death row where. Their would be less resistance on killing them. The act of killing someone that is a repeat offender and has been to prison many times is moral and should be allowed. The act of killing someone that has been to prison once and has not committed the same act or has not been in trouble with the law since their release should not be put to death. Those that pose a risk to society if they escape prison should be put to death.

Lethal injection has it's pros and cons and here is a link that says the pros and cons!

http://deathpenaltyproscons.weebly.com/

Side: Yes

I have wondered on that one. If someone is given 4 life sentences, why not just punch the lights out on them? What's the difference at the point?

Side: Yes
Harvard(659) Disputed
1 point

The act of killing someone that is a repeat offender and has been to prison many times is moral and should be allowed.

So, if I get arrested, repeatedly, for petty theft, I should be killed?

Those that pose a risk to society if they escape prison should be put to death.

The risk being potentially missing potato chips at a 7-Eleven...

Side: No
2 points

-----So, if I get arrested, repeatedly, for petty theft, I should be killed----

If you set a bomb off and kill 5,000 people, you can justify you being killed logically.

Side: Yes
2 points

----Those that pose a risk to society if they escape prison should be put to death.

The risk being potentially missing potato chips at a 7-Eleven...-----

If they raped and murdered your daughter, you'd consider it an easy call.

Side: Yes
DBCooper(2194) Clarified
1 point

Harvard when does petty theft require lethal injection .........

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Plenty of people have forgiven incredible violence against themselves, their relations, and their loved ones. So you're just factually incorrect on that point. There are people who value their own ethical standards more highly than retribution, and assuming that they're deluded or misinformed is nothing more than a very simplistic presumption of your own moral values as superior without the effort of any real argumentation. If you want to make an actual case for your position that requires more than an emotive appeal to sentiment...

Side: Yes

Yes, that is true. I do not see how someone could forgive such a disgusting creature. You hurt my child or my partner you better be in prison before I catch you. The only way you will survive is behind bars. No one will just get the mercy of the law if the kill, rape or torture my kids or my partner. And even than I would not forgive them. I will go to hell before I forgive such a disgusting animal.

Side: Yes
1 point

Of course it should be, for execution of multiple murderers of people who have tortured and murdered.

I also believe that it should be available for people who want to end their lives.

Side: Yes
1 point

In my opinion the electric chair should still be the lead way of death sentencing...but since it has been deemed "inhumane" the next best thing is to lethally inject them.

Side: Yes
valeecarri(52) Disputed
1 point

hello,

wouldn't that be taking the easy way out, though? death? and isn't the death penalty itself questionable? I mean killing a person for murder would that not be hypocritical? or even better; killing someone in a country where murder is illegal.

have a good day! =)

Side: No
1 point

Some people commit crimes that are very inhumane and unacceptable. Using lethal injection should be legal for people who commit unforgivable major crimes. Or the electric chair, that'll work too 😂

Side: Yes
1 point

At the end of the day if you want to give capital punishment to someone without shooting,beheading, or hanging a person to death then this is the best option. Moreover it sounds less frightening and violent than the other three.

Side: Yes
1 point

No because nobody deserves to die no matter what the crime.That would be inhumane

Side: No
1 point

So after Assad mass murdered all of those Syrians, if we caught him, what would you suggest we do with him? Feed him grapes and wine?

Side: Yes
1 point

nobody deserves to die

Yet that's the only thing, unrelated to food, that everyone does in common.

Side: No
smilinbobs(600) Disputed
1 point

Your statement is not at all true there are many people who deserve to die. There are people who lack empathy for anyone and they torture and kill other humans for their entertainment. These people do deserve to die and it is irresponsible to allow them to live so that innocent people's lives are in danger. It's people like you that have allowed society to degrade to a point where people think it's okay to enter a school and murder innocent children or to invade a home rape the female children and tie them to a bed and set the house on fire. Those people are happy to be inhumane to anyone who crosses paths with them yet you would prefer to allow them to continue living rather than their future victims I would say that borders on insane.

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

It does not necessarily follow that someone deserves to die just because it is prudent to kill them. Those are distinct, albeit potentially interrelated, questions.

The notion that opposition to state executions is responsible for school shootings, home invasion, rape, arson, etc. is not only unsubstantiated but so extreme as to sound nothing short of ludicrous. All of these have existed alongside state executions and continue to occur where such executions take place, and notably have lower incidence in some nations that do not have state executions than in some of those which do. Nor is execution the only option, since lifetime incarceration is generally also an option. "Keeping society safe" may be one of the weakest argument for state executions, even wen it's given a strong defense which I don't think yours is.

Side: No
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

What is the foundation for your ides of deserts? How can you determine whether someone deserves something or not?

Similarly, how do you identify something as being inhumane?

Side: Yes
1 point

Hello t:

One of the problems with the death penalty, is that we're NOT sure the guy's we're executing ARE guilty.. Over the last decade, more than a 100 death row inmates have been found INNOCENT, and released..

So, with a BAD record like that, we oughta STOP that crap.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

excon

Side: No
1 point

Come on Con. If we'd captured Hitler in 1945, we can't take him out?

Side: Yes
1 point

Hello again, bront:

Your personal HYSTERIA about me, DISQUALIFIES you from serious debate.. Why should I engage you?? You'll only call me a liar..

excon

Side: Yes
1 point

You couldn't capture him.

Side: No
smilinbobs(600) Disputed
1 point

So your claim is that less than 1% error over 40 years in the initial conviction is a huge problem with the death penalty? I would say that, with the appeal process that exists the margin of error for execution is very close to zero percent. How many of the people on your list were actually put to death and then found not guilty that is the problem area, what percentage is that figure?

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Wrongful conviction is not limited to the death penalty but exists at all levels of sentencing, and presumably occurs at even higher rates for some offenses where the sentence is (regarded as) less severe. if wrongful conviction is enough basis from which to stop using execution, why is it not enough of a basis from which to stop using sentencing?

Moreover, the criminal justice system you are referencing has a very bad record of racism and classism that arguably contributes to higher mortality rates and economic unrest among those demographics... so again why don't we stop the whole criminal justice system? Or, as long as this a bad record is the whole standard for something why don't we just abandon government?

Side: Yes

Only if the crimes are certain.

Considering that they aren't many times, not unless that changes. You should take some inspiration from the Indian legal philosophy.

Side: No
1 point

the whole death penalty is a little funny to me. For example; imagine a murderer gets the chair or the injection in this case, so you're gonna punish a murderer by killing another person. if anything lethal injections and everything is the easy way out!

Side: No