My version of capital punishment should be legal

Lethal injection kills the person by first putting the person to sleep, and then stopping the breathing and heart, in that order" Not as scary as getting ripped apart. Common sense would tell you that, to some degree, this would be a worse deterrent. ""if criminals were put into a lottery, that would mean their best chance of living would be to encourage others to commit violent crime. That's one reason why it's a bad idea." You"d have to be very good at persuading in order to convince others to commit crimes they wouldn't"t otherwise commit and risk a horrible death. Also I think the excruciating death would deter more criminals than the criminals could encourage. The chances YOU will be chosen are already very unlikely so getting a few more murderers to commit crime is not ultimately going to make much difference. It is just the fact that there is a possibility that you will suffer a painful death. "+ If only one person were selected, criminals have a good chance to get away with murder. Are people who have lost loved ones supposed to be satisfied by watching a different criminal die to the one who murdered their relative? Wouldn't they know the real murderer is still alive, and will probably never face justice?" Firstly all other criminals will face justice with a lengthy prison sentence so its not like they"re walking away free men. Also, it is not about revenge so loved ones are not relevant. It is about deterring future crime. "+ Innocent people would therefore risk the rack to avenge someone they love. Desperate or greedy criminals who want to get away with robbing a bank etc will not be deterred either." Robbing banks would not entail murder and therefore they could not be executed. For revenge crime the judge would have to decide whether due to circumstances of a loved one being killed, the murderer should be let off to a degree. This would be done on a case by case basis. "+ Innocent people should not be killed (or become criminals), but even with your form of CP innocent people can die, though I admit it would be less likely. However suppose a life was executed, and everyone watched it but later it was found he/she was innocent, the public will be far more outraged." Public outrage is not an issue. If it deters it is ok. All our decisions are made on likelihood. We cannot know for certain an innocent won"t be killed but that shouldn"t stop us putting forward a policy that will save innocent lives as a deterrent. Allowing people to drive cars is a policy decision which may have the consequences of innocent death. It"s a risk we have to take. Most people will be satisfied if the murderer was convicted beyond reasonable doubt. There are some crimes like school shootings where it is beyond doubt who committed the crime. "+ People don't need to feel discriminated against because criminals are executed in a humane way and it's very unlikely that an innocent person will be imprisoned and less likely to be executed. If your form of CP were used people would feel discriminated against if after 10 years there hasn't been one white man killed, or one black woman killed, or one Chinese person, or one Christian, or one Muslim etc." No because discrimination involves a choice by a man. This system (picking names out of a hat) would not be down to a man"s decision so could not be discriminatory. "+ If this execution event of yours is held on let's say Christmas Day, that means the day after i.e. Boxing Day is a better day to kill someone, meaning innocent people will be afraid to go out on that day or around that time." It is not a better day to kill someone as everyone that commits murder in that year are equally included in the group of murderers, one of which will be executed. "+ For my final point I'd like to say by that people should find it in their self to forgive others, it's how we move on in life and enjoy life, your method of CP takes that opportunity away." The victims can forgive but the state will carry out CP. I do not see this as a problem. I"m sure those who want to forgive would prefer innocents don"t die in future rather than a murderer be forgiven. "My opponent says his method would cost less money, but what about the other costs I have shown?" The moral costs do not outweigh the moral benefits. And on the plus side it also saves money. Thanks for a great debate!