The Death Penalty should be Abolished

I accept your style however typically in debating the opposition also needs to provide actual arguments against in order to have a more legitimate case. Prison is undoubtedly a tough place. Cherry-picked articles which investigate some cases in some prisons are not at all representative of the overall fact that prisons are very tough and unpleasant places. If in your opinion they are not tough enough then governments can pursue policies to make them tougher rather than bringing in the death penalty in order to satisfying the baying crowds of emotional citizens. However, killing them, as I have established, is not only painful but removes any possibility of redemption as well as leaving it open for murdering innocent people. Furthermore, since we are discussing people who have committed crimes which are serious enough to warrant a death penalty then your links are even more unrepresentative since, having read them, they talk about prisoners in B and C class prisons who are not necessarily in secure or solitary confinement. You made the strange claim that because somehow typically poorer criminals don't have nice lives they therefore won't resent being stripped of freedom. Prisoners are stripped of very basic autonomy and freedom of movement and therefore prisoners really do resent these constraints which, if you spend 10 years or more with, really do lead to immense mental illness (60% of male prisoners experience mental illness in the US). You were right to admit that "prison is not sunshine and flowers". I am also admitting that it isn't "dystopia" as well. But prison is undoubtedly a tough and unpleasant place which as you said yourself, "punish people". Therefore, prison is a workable and satisfactory alternative to DP. Concerning the murder of innocent people, I apologise if you think I was trying to argue that you didn't care about innocents dying - that is not what I mean. However, whereas I am explaining that currently many innocent people are murdered by the state you are arguing that this is unfortunate but not a strong reason for ending capital punishment as we can "save more lives down the road". I'm not sure which lives you think you are going to be saving. If a criminal for a truly abhorrent crime is too dangerous then the Criminal Justice System must make sure they never get out and that they are kept in a secure unit in prison. We can thus control them and prevent them from causing harm. However, what is certain is that under the status quo it is guaranteed people will die whereas you have suggested that this is justifiable since you have a dubious belief that more people will survive in the long run. I find this claim very unconvincing. We can disagree over the validity of each statistic concerning its proof of a certain point but one thing is for sure - innocent people are put to death and this is a serious problem which should make you reconsider DP. I suppose that withholding critical information isn't lying but it is certainly immoral and disingenuous. I think families would want to know. This proposal would be disastrous for the image of the Criminal Justice System. Now, I really don't think it is helpful to get this debate bogged down over a racial discussion. The reason I brought up racism is that it is a very good example of bias within the Criminal Justice System and thus further illuminates the reality that the system has flaws and injustice is served, in some cases, to a literally deadly extent. As a matter of fact, there is a actually an element of sexism in courts. Men tend to actually get much harsher sentences. The same is true for black people having committed the same crime: Black people are 7 times more likely to be convicted wrongly of murder. Actually, think about that statistic - it takes proportion into account. Furthermore, whilst there is a convincing link between masculinity and violence there is no link between ethnicity and violence and yet there is a link between racial bias and injustice. Now, absolutely this is partly to do with poverty (which by the way is more evidence of historical and current racism) but to claim that racism has absolutely no place in institutions is false. I gave you an example of blatantly racist jurors. Racism plays a part and thus our criminal justice system is in many ways fundamentally flawed. Thus it makes even more sense to get rid of a punishment, so severe, that those same flaws in the system lead to such disastrous consequences. Countries with lower homicide rates do not have DP. I have seen no convincing evidence of this. One thing is for sure, most European states do not have the death penalty and also have much lower crime and homicide rates than the US for example (since these countries have are more socio-economically similar, this is a fairer comparison to make). I really don't think comparing the case of SA and Japan is helpful to the actual debate. However, they are not fair comparisons to make. Your DRC example is more reasonable but I almost laughed when you brought it up as an example of a less brutal state. The DRC is one of the most violent and dangerous places in the world. There is a huge amount of rape and violence and many unreported homicides. According to GPI studies, the DRC is the 8th most violent country in the world (SA is 39th). Look, I don't deny some cases where criminals are truly evil to the end. But this policy is not about them. It's about all kinds of people who end up on death row. Many of these are genuinely remorseful. While we may be able to kill some people who seem to actually deserve it the reality is that many others are deprived of their ability to make positive changes. Furthermore, the victims' families are unable to get closure from the perpetrators of crime. An eye for an eye is an animalistic and deeply emotional stand point. I understand why people feel this way. If one of my family was murdered I would probably want to see the murderer dead in a ditch but that is not a rational stand point. An eye for an eye is revenge and not justice. Justice is what we want and not anger and bitterness. Murderers do not deserve to die. Why? Because they don't want to die in most cases. Because execution is extremely painful. Because in most cases they do show remorse and can change their ways. And because execution achieves nothing except perpetuating a cycle of the normalisation of violence. Just saying murder is unforgivable is not good enough. If an abused wife shot dead her abusive husband and showed genuine guilt and sorrow for having to do that then - I would forgive her. Even if a gang criminal murdered an innocent civilian if they changed their ways and showed remorse - I would forgive them. From a religious stand point (although I'm not religious) forgiveness is a key aspect and clearly serves some purpose. Hate and anger is not useful what is is finding ways to make sure that it never happens again and gaining true retribution for a crime. I don't personally have a disability however to an extent people with mental disabilities have diminished responsibility. Furthermore, locking up people with autism or other disabilities does not in any way help, since is cases where disabilities are severe, criminals are often not emotional able to appreciate the nature of crime but this is certainly not the case for all people with disabilities. Furthermore, if citizens see that a state is willing to exercise violence, since that state is an authority often respected and followed by citizens, those citizens can then believe that violence is acceptable in the same way that kids who grow up in abusive households also often have a perverted notions of violence. Although obviously you are not legislating for the world government (and thank god you're not considering your plans for some kind of stalinist "show execution"), you seem to have conceded that executions are absolutely horrible ordeals. I'm glad you believe this; so do I. This is further supportive of my proposal to abolish DP since it is cruel, painful and thus inhumane. What does causing suffering achieve? People on their death bed aren't going to renounce their crimes because you'll kill them anyway. It achieves absolutely nothing. I want prisoners to apologise to victims and to lead a better life after having been punished in prison. It is revenge on behalf of the victims when the state murders criminals. This is still hateful revenge which serves no purpose except to give a false sense of justice to the victims. True justice is a criminal turning to the victims and apologising to them for their actions. And no, most soldiers are not murderers. As explained, under my model those who kill to directly stop more killing and suffering are not guilty of murder but have engaged in reasonable killing as ultimately they will have caused less suffering. Let's be rule utilitarianist here. So, ultimately not only is prison a suitable and workable alternative, the death penalty is cruel and achieves nothing as well as brutalising society. Furthermore, the current system murders a lot of innocent people which is terrible and unacceptable. This combined should make any advocate of the DP think twice. I deeply regret making it such short amount of time. In future I'll change it. https://www.theglobeandmail.com... Here is a touching example of how people are flawed but not condemned to death. The man in this case should certainly not die.