CreateDebate


Debate Info

57
47
It's painless It's Cruel
Debate Score:104
Arguments:107
Total Votes:108
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 It's painless (52)
 
 It's Cruel (44)

Debate Creator

StickinStone(649) pic



Is Lethal Injection Humane?

It's painless

Side Score: 57
VS.

It's Cruel

Side Score: 47
1 point

What do you mean by "humane"?

Side: It's painless
StickinStone(649) Clarified
3 points

Oxford dictionary:

adjective

1having or showing compassion or benevolence:

regulations ensuring the humane treatment of animals

inflicting the minimum of pain:

humane methods of killing

Side: It's painless
pakicetus(1455) Clarified
1 point

Well, compassion and benevolence are pretty subjective terms.

However, most forms of lethal injection fit the third definition.

Side: It's painless
Jungelson(3959) Disputed
1 point

Silly definition. humans get much pleasure out of others torture. You don't find it bizarre people are willing to pay large sums of money to watch Saw films- depicting their fellow man being disemboweled for entertainment.

Besides, other animals show just as much, if not more compassion both to humans and each other.

But using your definition, no it is far from humane. Even if it is totally painless, it still inflicts mental pain on both the victim, and his/her family.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

I don't know? Let's try it out on someone from CD and see.

Side: It's painless
1 point

Good idea.

WHO'S FIRST?

Side: It's painless
1 point

I've got a few ideas, but I think I'll keep 'em to myself for now.

Side: It's painless

U guyz r Psycho.

Side: It's painless
1 point

I do not see a wrong in killing someone after they killed 6 people or a 1,000 people. I just do not see it.

Side: It's painless
Intangible(4934) Disputed
1 point

Then we should put all war veterans to death.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

Your responses to this debate made me suspect that your replies were not particularly thought out. This comment assures me that there isn't much to your reasoning.

The problem with whatisright's comment is that the executioner with the needle may have killed 6 to 1000 people but should not be put to death. The problem with your comment is a similar error, it lacks context and perspective.

Side: It's painless
whatisright(19) Disputed
1 point

do not be stupid. you know what I mean. LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Side: It's painless
1 point

The lethal injection executioner has killed people. I assume you mean murder?

Side: It's Cruel
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

You presume not only a legitimate legal system, but the infallibility of such a system. Even where a legitimate legal system is in place there is still the potential for error and the possibility of executing an innocent person.

Additionally, what exactly makes it right to kill another person as a penalty for them killing someone? I would contend that the assumption implicit in your conclusion is itself unfounded, if not outright incorrect.

Side: It's Cruel
StickinStone(649) Clarified
1 point

The argument for the fallibility of of the system is probably the best argument against the death penalty. It's valid to want to keep 10 guilty men alive if it keeps you from executing 1 innocent man.

The reasoning behind the idea that it is right to take the life of a murderer comes from a particular view of rights. The murderer does not value life, when he acts on this lack of value, he forfeits his own right to life. He needs to be removed from society. Locking him away would remove him, but it also cost money. Since he doesn't value human life, and has acted in a way to surrender his own right to life, death is a valid option. This view of rights holds the death penalty as legitimate for certain crimes, but it also requires the system to be correct.

Side: It's painless

I don't see why it wouldn't be human. Using the topic of prisoners getting lethal injection; if they are a threat to society, lethal injection is more quick and painless than hanging, decapitation, or electrical shock (electric chair). It is also less of a mess.

Side: It's painless

Yeah its humane.

Side: It's painless

I'm going to agree that it is humane by comparison. Though the other side makes a valid point about mental anguish, I think the anguish would be greater if they thought they were going to feel a great deal of pain.

Side: It's painless
1 point

It's painless, it ends it there and then, if you're going through so much pain that you feel you have to (unless it's mentality problem), then it's the quickest way to have it. Humane? I think it's more of mercy killing.

Side: It's painless

Killing anybody is inhumane.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

Killing anything is inhumane.

Even killing a head of lettuce?

Side: It's painless
Intangible(4934) Disputed
1 point

You can't kill lettuce.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

Here's a different route:

Is it inhumane to kill a torturer who is about to torture?

Side: It's painless
Intangible(4934) Disputed
1 point

Yes it is. He was just doing his Job. You could have knocked him out with a brick or something and then saved the person who he was about to torture. If you accidentally kill him then well...accidents happen. But purposefully killing someone would be inhumane.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

I do not think they should be killed that way. they should die by being tasted on.

Side: It's Cruel
2 points

Testing on them would be profitable. Which means it would also be profitable to falsely accuse innocent people so that you have more test subjects. I think testing is a bad idea.

Side: It's painless
1 point

Killing any body is humane. But what must be done must be done.

Side: It's Cruel
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

By what rationale is lethal injection (or any other form of execution) something which must be done?

Side: It's painless
StickinStone(649) Clarified
1 point

It really depends on the context and the crime. Some states have adopted the death penalty for certain crimes against children. These states saw a drop in such crimes though there isn't a significant decrease in other types of crime as a result of the death penalty.

The idea of the death penalty as a disincentive to crime is valid for some types of criminals but not for others. In order for the disincentive to be taken seriously, the actual punishment must be carried out.

Side: It's painless
1 point

All human action is a consequence of biological predisposition conditioned by environmental exposure. This includes all actions which have been, are, or could be punishable by state sanctioned execution. To kill another human being for actions beyond their control is inherently inhumane.

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

All human action is a consequence of biological predisposition...To kill another human being for actions beyond their control is inherently inhumane.

Predisposition is not the same as predestination. This seems to be more a debate over free will. If it is, there's not really more to say since the people in government are predisposed to carry out death sentences and all of it is beyond out control.

Side: It's painless
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

My argument was not one of predestination, as that is theological, but of secular determinism. I am not arguing the non-existence of free will but presenting it as the framework behind my argument on the particular issue of lethal injection. I can divorce my arguments from a framework no more than you can.

Your conclusion regarding the predisposition towards execution is premature and over-simplistic. Thinking that free will is a mythical non-reality is a causal variable capable of differently affecting human thought and action. We do not control what response we have, but there is no reason to presume that a continued preferentiality for executions given that altered variable. In fact, as our awareness of human cognitive processes and behavior has developed the death penalty has become more constrained and in some places wholly abolished. More specifically, many legal courts have begun to introduce considerations for criminal insanity as a consequence of research indicating that such conduct is not under the control of the criminally convicted.

Side: It's Cruel

Killing any human (against their will) is inhumane. A lethal injection is just a more humane way of doing an inhumane thing, it still is not humane

Side: It's Cruel
1 point

Beheading by guillotine is technically the least painful means of killing someone. Its quick and if there is any pain associated with it, you'd be in pain for less than a fraction of a second. When you really think about it all "modern" execution methods: lethal injection, electrocution, and poisonous gas are very sadistic by comparison.

Side: It's Cruel