The Death Penalty Should be Abolished

Pro claims the death penalty is revenge for the murder committed and is therefore wrong, but one could also argue that prison terms or life in prison is revenge for the same crime. One could also argue that life in prison is worse, each day of one"s life being constant torment, than to go through the few minutes of pain to die and be over with it. Women get raped in prison, that's just one of the horrors or prison. "In 2008 [according to recent Bureau of Justice Statistics], more than 216,600 people were sexually abused in prisons and jails"overall, that"s almost six hundred people a day- twenty-five an hour"...In 2005, "the Office of the Inspector General and the DOJ released a report documenting widespread sexual abuse by prison employees nationwide, noting that only 37% had faced some kind of legal action. Of those, " walked away with no more than probation. It took all of this evidence for the BOP to finally criminalize sexual contact as a felony in 2006, so that guards can actually face up to five years in prison".[24] However, "when authorities confirmed that corrections staff had sexually abused inmates in their care, only 42% of those officers had their cases referred to prosecution; only 23% were arrested, and only 3% charged, indicted, or convicted. Fifteen per cent were actually allowed to keep their jobs".[19] Despite such legislative progress, women are fully dependent on the guards for basic necessities and privileges, and in many states, guards have access to inmates" personal history files which can empower them to threaten prisoners" children if the women retaliate.[25] Female inmates who retaliate also face the loss of good time for early parole in addition to prolonged periods of disciplinary segregation, and detrimental write-ups, which further deters acts of resistance.[19] The fear incited by such threats as well as the concern that no one will believe them or that no one really cares can successfully silence women. Experience of sexual abuse in prison can greatly impede women"s capacity to reintegrate into society upon release." http://www.google.com... this shows that prison itself is inhumane, so since Pro argues the death penalty is revenge that causes pain, should we abolish prisons too wince prisoners also go through great psychological and many times physical pain for a much longer period than one who just gets the needle? It's extremely difficult to find a punishment that is characterized by tenderness and compassion, and yet this is what Pro wants murders to get - humane punishment. Is there such a thing? On Premise 2 Pro says "The premise of revenge is to inflict near, identical, or even excessively more pain than the criminal caused the victim, and that is just escalating the amount of immoral action (think Gandhi's eye-for-an-eye principle)." Human means "characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed."http://www.google.com...... Locking a person away from society, from friends and family, without hope of getting married, or having kids, is not humane. That kind of mental torment is WORSE than being dead, where you feel nothing at all. Yes, Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind," but truth isn't decided by what Gandhi says. If Ghandi had said "murder is OK" would that make it right? If you want Ghadi to be authoritative in this debate, then can I bring in Moses as well, who said "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"? (Exodus 21:24) Truth isn't decided by quoting your favorite religious figure, is it? Ghandi once said "that the white race of South Africa should be the predominating race" over the Indians (The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Government of India (CWMG), Vol. I, p. 105) So he himself shared the racism of his time, and it only his own bitter experiences at the hands of whites that changed his mind. What becomes of his authority if he changes his mind again? On premise 4, let me ask, should not the penalty be proportionate to the crime? Even if you are that one murder won't do it, its not hard to imagine that some crimes would. Ten murders? 100 murders? Genocide? At some point, the death penalty becomes a balanced punishment against the crime. So even if you rule out capitol punishment in some cases, you can't rule it out in all of them. To claim that no crime whatever could ever justify capitol punishment would deny the very principle of punishment fitting the crime. It would mean that Hitler couldn't be punished anymore than the bank robber who serves life in prison. II. The Death Penalty is Expensive Yes, and there are ways to make it less expensive. You can"t argue that something is morally wrong just because it is expensive. Why should a murderer get to live off my tax dollars, eat and drink, and someday come out and live, when my child he killed has no such opportunity? III. The Death Penalty Does Not Deter Crime What if it doesn"t? The existence of prisons in many countries still has not reduced their crime rate, so is that a reason to get rid of prisons? No punishment can stop crime. So get rid of punishments?