Death Penalty

For my final arguments, like in the second round, I would like to present even further arguments for the death penalty. They are the following: Berry states "A fact that is conveniently overlooked by anti-capital punishment campaigners is that we are all ultimately going to die. In many cases, we will know of this in advance and suffer great pain and emotional anguish in the process. This is particularly true of those diagnosed as having terminal cancer. It is apparently acceptable to be "sentenced to death" by one's family doctor without having committed any crime at all but totally unacceptable to be sentenced to death by a judge having been convicted of murder or drug trafficking" (the crimes for which the majority of executions worldwide are carried out) after a fair and careful trial" (1) She continues "I have never personally believed that any form of death, let alone execution, is either instant or painless, so which method of capital punishment should a modern "civilised" society use? Should our worst criminals be given a completely pain free death even if the technology exists to provide one, or should a degree of physical suffering be part of the punishment? Whatever method is selected should have some deterrent value whilst not deliberately causing a slow or agonising death" (1). Another site says "The number of people sentenced to death in 2001 was 155, the smallest number since 1979, and an almost 50% drop from the average number of death sentences in 1994-99" and "The number of people under sentence of death declined in 2001, the first decrease in 25 years" and "Overall, the average time between sentencing and execution for those executed between 1977 and 2001 was 10 years and 3 months" (2). The following statistics prove the death penalty is a publicly desirable method of punishment (3): Gallup Polls Are you in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder? ForAgainstNo Opinion 2007 Oct 4-769%27%04% 2006 May 2-565%28%07% 2005 Oct 13-1664%30%06% 2005 May 2-574%23%03% 2004 May 2-471%26%03% 2003 Oct 6-864%32%04% 2003 May 19-2170%28%02% 2003 May 5-774%24%02% 1937 Dec 1-660%33%07% FOX NEWS / OPINION DYNAMICS POLL Do you favor or oppose the death penalty for persons convicted of premeditated murder? FavorOpposeNot Sure 2005 March69%24%08% 2003 June69%23%08% 2001 June68%22%10% 2001 Apr66%23%11% 2000 June68%24%08% 2000 Feb67%22%11% 1998 Jan74%18%08% 1997 June73%18%09% 1997 May76%17%07% ABC NEWS / WASHINGTON POST Do you favor or oppose the death penalty for persons convicted of murder? FavorOpposeDon't Know 2005 April65%26%09% 2001 Apr63%28%09% 2000 June63%27%10% 2000 Jan64%27%09% 1998 Aug69%27%04% 1996 Aug77%19%04% Over time we have seen steady numbers in the United States for the death penalty. It has been said that "It is reasonable to assume that if a majority is in favour of a particular thing in a democracy, their wishes should be seriously considered with equal consideration given to the downside of their views" (1). The majority is not always correct, but in a democracy like ours morality demands that there is an underlying theme when people agree, which may point to some objective truth if there is such a reality. Rebuttal My opponent made a technical error in the last round and I ran out of space before I could respond adequately. So, I would like to do this now. Kbug seems to think that life in prison would be preferable to capital punishment because one avoids possible pain and suffering, which could be inhumane and maybe even be considered torture. I would like use the logic against her. For example, Amnesty International (AI) and the United Nations (UN) defines torture as the following: "The UN Convention Against Torture defines torture as "the intentional infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering for purposes such as obtaining information or a confession, or punishing, intimidating or coercing someone." (4). AI goes on to say "Torture is always illegal. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." (4) This is pretty broad and they include the word "mental." So, if an inmate in prison misses his freedom and gets depressed over it, under that definition the prisoner technically being tortured, not just for a few minutes (if there were complications with lethal injection), but for life. So, I question, which is more inhumane? This shows that Kbug contradicts herself and blows up a big portion of her argument. Let me go on to this editorial in PloS that Kbug mentions in her opening statement. She also claimed in her second round rebuttal that I used a biased source, trying to discredit its credibility. I would like to now link the two statements. The authors of that editorial said "Each of the editors of PLoS Medicine opposes the death penalty" (5). These authors admitted they are biased. What do you know! Kbug used a biased source herself. By nature, humans are biased creatures. We each have a tendency to think what we want to think and we will only believe something outside of our comfort zone to a degree. Each person has a lens that they see reality. It is hard to define "true objectivity." So, am I biased? Yes, and that is okay. This is a debate. She did not provide any evidence that would prove my source prodeathpenalty.com is inaccurate, other than their name appears to be "biased." So, Kbug again, has been disingenuous by implying that a group with a certain point of view ought not to be credible. Kbug, you are the one here who is not credible. The PloS editorial also reads "Accordingly, in lethal injection procedures intravenous access has often been attempted (with frequent failures) by untrained staff, the execution mixture has precipitated and blocked IV tubes, and lethal doses have been unreliably calculated (5). This is a fine attempt at trying to discredit the death penalty, but this observation just implies that sloppy work has been done. It does not disqualify the method of execution as a valid method of punishment for society. If doctors were allowed to make the procedure better, then such complaints would not occur. My opponent forfeited this round. We don't know why. Usually when people are confident in their argument they come back and finish. Could it be she realized I might be right or maybe she was over her head and cannot debate successfully? We will never know, but I ask the reader to consider this possibility when they go and vote. My opponent did not meet the resolution, she quit in the middle of the debate and she proposed very weak and disingenuous arguments at times. Do not let her win. Vote pro. Thank you. ___________ (1) Berry, E. http://captalpunishmentuk.org... (2) http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... (3) http://www.clarkprosecutor.org... (4) http://www.amnestyusa.org... (5) http://www.plosmedicine.org...