The death penalty should be illegal in the united states.

This one should be fun :] "My opponent begins by saying that I "don't have an answer" regarding the Lord's commandments. That is an absurd and ridiculous assertion; the reality is that SHE doesn't have an answer to MY point, which maintains that a Separation between Church and States exists as it pertains to the laws of the United States of America. As such, what the "Lord" says is completely irrelevant to this debate." 1. Okay. Now that we established it it "irrelevant" , I will move on. "Next Pro again makes a wrongful assumption in saying that I have "avoided" her question of what gives us the right to kill anyone. Well, as I already stated, people who intentionally and maliciously deprive another of their right to life open themselves up in justice to any proportional punishment. The answer is that the death penalty "accomplishes justice." We have a social contract to the society in which we live; if we don't obey the law, we are punished. Punishment should vary depending on the crime, the intent, the proof and other individual circumstances. In cases where a jury of peers along with the prosecutor and other court officials deem appropriate, the death penalty should be a viable option to achieve justice on the same scale (or similar) to that of the crime committed. We have a "right" to implement the death penalty because of the social contract theory, and because of our responsibility to achieve justice and punish offenders as well as uphold the laws." 2. Do you think that justice is better served by the death penalty? Do you think that we are "doing away" with the whole situation when the death penalty comes into play? How is this benefiting us? Let me enlighten you on my perspective of this subject. ~What is the history of the death penalty? The death penalty has been going on as long as the 18 century B.C., back when King Hammurabi confirmed it. The first recorded execution in the English American colonies was in 1608 when officials executed George Kendall of Virginia for supposedly plotting to betray the British to the Spanish. (source) http://www.pbs.org... Don't you think its about time we start thinking of new ways to punish people? We are clearly above the ancient times of bathing in public places and eating with our hands. "Pro next states that "half or a good amount of people are wrongly convicted." Those who are wrongly sentenced to death should be the only ones relevant to this discussion, and moreover, I'd like to see proof and statistics backing up that claim before addressing it. Also, later on in this debate I will explain how those wrongly convicted are few and far between, and have an abundant amount of time before the actual death to appeal their case." 3. Just because few people have been wrongly convicted, doesn't mean its not a problem. What about our "awesome justice system (I say again?" Oh yeah. statistics. "More than 7,000 people have been executed in the United States since 1900, according to research conducted by Radelet. The United States and Japan are the only industrialized countries that still apply the death penalty." http://www.colorado.edu... Number of U.S. executions Value Year 1999 98 Year 2000 85 Year 2001 66 Year 2002 71 Average per year since 1976 29 Total executions since 1976 820 http://www.religioustolerance.org... Since 1977, over 1,100 people have been executed in the U.S.; there are currently around 3,300 men and women on death row across the country. Grassroots activists throughout the USA play an essential role in advocating against this human rights violation through monitoring cases, mobilizing around upcoming events, and lobbying for anti-death penalty legislation. http://www.amnestyusa.org... "Pros next argument is that if I or a loved one were wrongly convicted, I would be upset. This is true; however, the reality is that only a handful of people actually die from the death penalty each year. There are A LOT more murders and homicides committed than the number of actual people who make it to the end of death row. In this case, we have to implement the philosophy that we should choose the approach which achieves the maximum amount of justice, even at the sacrifice of a few (Utilitarianism). Plus, as I said, with technology and other advances, our likelihood of killing an innocent person is far less than in the past. Moreover, prisoners on death row typically have to wait over *20 years* before they die... Plenty of time to overturn a wrong conviction or appeal time and again" 4. Statistics at the top. Repeat. Over turn? once the wrong being has been done its done. there's no turning back, and theirs going to be a consequence. What makes it right for a person to have to wait 20 years to be sentenced to death? "Moving on to a rebuttal of my arguments, Pro said that the killer was going to be punished either way (via life in prison) so implementing the death penalty was unnecessary. Obviously what's important to consider here is the nature of the crime and the morality behind the punishment. Culpae poenae par esto -- Latin for "Let the punishment fit the crime." If one takes another's life and robs them of all capacity to feel emotion, to think thoughts, to experience life in general, etc., then it's fair to punish the offender in the same way and rob him of the same right to life that he or she imposed upon another." 5.But taking another life....what makes this right? can you prove this? an eye for an eye..that was back in the constitution. 6. No, you didn't explain enough to where "people" could understand. If our system is so well put together, we wouldn't need this alternative to our process. 7. How does a mother/father having there daughter/son killed satisfying and achieving justice? And jail for life is not as nearly as painful for a family as the death penalty. statistics as to how it is on the opposite side? put the thought into your own hands. you would rather have the family member killed than put in jail for life? the only reason I could see that is to end the suffering. 8.No, there's a difference between a consequence and just morally wrong. Just because someone slaps you doesn't give you the right to slap them back, because it all ends up in a brawl and no one really wins, we just judge that by who looks less bloody, or whoever the one is who didn't burst into tears. and in the end we still have the "consequence behind it" 9. You don't watch tv do you. ohh so much fun is this. :] here is from (source) http://www.vancouversun.com... The cell was cold and he was only given one blanket and no pillow, she said. He had to share the only nail-clippers with inmates who are HIV-positive, McEwan heard. He had no clean sheet or clothing for the first month he was in jail after he was arrested and charged with first-degree murder in connection with the October 2007 gangland slaughter known as the Surrey Six slayings. Eldred admitted Bacon's initial few weeks in jail were the worst, but that things are slightly better now after he was moved to a medical isolation unit within the Surrey jail. There is access to a light switch, radio, electrical outlet and some small appliances in the common area to which he gets access One Hour A Day. But Eldred said the microwave and television have been smashed more than once by mentally ill inmates housed in the same unit. One of those inmates, who has since been moved, would scream all day that "the guards were going to harvest his internal organs." Eldred said her client got an expert to view the facilities at Surrey pre-trial, including the filthy cell in which he was held last spring.