I accept

Death penalty should be allowed.

should the death penalty be allowed?

death penalty

I accept the challenge for the debate. Good luck!

The death penalty should NOT be allowed

Hi Sara, I wish to debate this.May the best debator win :D

The death penalty should NOT be allowed

The death penalty should not be allowed as you know the old saying, two wrongs don't make a right. The purpose of the death penalty is to stop people committing, killing is a crime.

The death penalty should be allowed

In conclusion, I completely agree that death penalty shouldnt be allowed. I really shouldnt have accepted this debate, hm?

The Death Penalty

My position as Con will be to show that the death penalty as it is currently being applied in the USA should not be allowed while Pro will have to argue that it is justified and should continue to be applied as it currently is. Pro has to post his opening argument in round 1 and skip his last round.

Death Penalty

The death penalty should be allowed because those who kill innocent people should pay for it with their own lives. The death penalty should be allowed as an acceptable punishment for those who kill innocent people. Taxpayers should not have to pay for a killer to spend the rest of their lives not working, watching cable tv, and working out. The killer took an innocent life and should not be given any of the privileges and luxuries that they took away from the victim.

should death penitently stay

I'm not sure why Pro challenged me specifically to this debate, especially given that my profile says I am for the death penalty, but since it was directed towards me I felt obligated to accept. I thank my opponent for this debate, and am honored to be debating "the-great-debater". Since my opponent A) Challenged me and B) Is Pro I feel he should have burden of proof. I will not argue this round so as to let him present his case first. This should be a short and sweet debate.

Death Penalty should be allowed

Hello and thank you for joining my debate I will be arguing in favor of not allowing the death penalty in the United States.

The death penalty should NOT be allowed

The death penalty should NOT be allowed

Thank you for setting up this debate. My opinion on this is not solidified and can be swayed if your debate is strong enough. I believe capital punishment should still be allowed but ONLY under the most dire and repulsive crimes. I do not believe killing 1 person justifies the death penalty, but 10-100 does. It must be a case in which the person is very bent on death and whose purpose is to destabilize and completely destroy any form of order and institute chaos and death in society. These types of people are not under the criteria of criminally insane, but instead the dangerously unfit to be a part of society. Normally, I believe in life sentences for serial killer or rapist cases, but death penalties should always be held as a reserve punishment when times are economically hard as it is costly to keep life sentences. Death sentences should also only be reserved for the individuals who are so incapable of being a functional member of civilization that no sentence would be able to mentally repair their state of mind and it would be necessary to execute them in the name of order. Again, I am not very bound to my argument and may be swayed if your argument is persuasive enough.

The United States should abolish the Death Penalty.

Round one is specifically for acceptance. However, I would like to say that in this debate, no evidence will be allowed, just 100% logic.

Death penalty should be allowed

The death penalty is not "wrong". It is just.

The death penalty should be allowed

What you think is not relevant. You have done nothing to show the death penalty is wrong or evil. And the fact is that those in prison have shorter lifespans than those not in prison, which means even your prison sentence is a death sentence, but you prefer the slow and torturous method and me the quick and easy method. You also want to make the criminal suffer. That is evil. I just want justice. I win.

The death penalty should be allowed

I don't like the idea of having the death penalty in Australia and I think that it should never be allowed

Should the death penalty be allowed in Australia

So my opponent has forfeited the last round, so I would like to continue with my argument right away. There can always be wrong convictions. According to statistics, in Illinois, there are about 20 wrong convictions a year. Would we really want to allow death penalty and allow innocent deaths? There is a Korean movie called "Miracle in Cell no.7" It is about a man who has a mental disability and is wrongly convicted of raping and murder. At the end, he gets executed because he wasn"t able to tell the truth about his innocence. Do we really want innocent deaths? By allowing death penalty, we are allowing all the people who are wrongly convicted of crimes to die an innocent death? Should that be justified? The obvious answer is a no. Because I strongly oppose to the justification of innocent executions, I would like to prevent the allowing of death penalty.

Death penalty should be allowed

Death sentence should be allowed (in all counties) due to the following factors: A) The Criminal would be sentenced to death/killed. He/She cannot do any more crimes/offenses. B) The number of criminals go down. C)Almost everyone is scared of death which makes less criminals due to their fear of death. D) If he/she is not killed he/she will have around 2% (as of 1999) chance of escaping which will have a chance to do the same crime.

Death sentences

The Death Penalty should be legalized as it lowers criminal rate, increases national security, and protects citizens. It lowers criminal rate, and murder rate. Each execution stops 5 murders. (3) Criminal are afraid of committing the crimes punishable by death penalty (rape murder, murder, kidnap murder, genocide, terrorism, etc) so it will lower the overall crime rate as there are many crimes eligible for punishment by death. Murderers can be executed, so it's safer for travel or public. Executions, although not a good thing overall, can protect our country and people from getting killed or hurt. It protects citizens from possible murder, rape, terrorism attack, genocide, etc. Executions are not common and only used for crimes that have been stated to be punishable by execution. Those are my reasons of why death penalty should be legal.

Resolved: The death penalty should be legalized.

Yes i will argue : The death penalty should be allowed implementation in certain circumstances. and yourself ;there should be no death penalty,

Debater's Choice

I will show try to show why the Death Penalty should not be allowed in the United States. My opponent will try to show why the Death Penalty should be allowed in the United States.

Death Penalty

I believe that the death penalty should be legal in every state. First, people that are crazy enough to commit murder shouldn't be in jail or on the streets. The criminal serving in jail will be their for life. Do you really want taxpayer's money going towards keeping some scum bag alive. I am completely for the death penalty. Good luck to you.

Death penalty

I think the death penalty should stay for the criminals that deserve it because first of all our tax money is paying to keep them in prison even after they did a horrendous crime and besides jail is not torture enough it barely even close enough homeless people come to jail all the time to get food and water and heating and another reason why there should definitely be a death penalty is because someone who is responsible on taking away lives from other people for no reason is just straight up cruel and evil and we should take charge and do something about it because innocent people don't deserve to die its not fair and these people need to learn and understand that what they did was not only wrong but monstrous and inhuman and it will also teach a lesson to others as well.

the death penalty should be allowed

The Death Penalty should be allowed anywhere, where justice is due to those who have committed heinous crimes, mainly Murder in the First Degree, IE with a pre-meditated intention. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... But I don't see why you think Australia should not get the Death penalty, compared to any other country in the world. The BOP is on my opponent, so I will assume the debate will begin in R2. Good luck.

The criminal justice system, in general, needs desperately to be rethought, it would be more accurately named the "Social Revenge System". The death penalty is currently applied inappropriately, however, it could still have a place.

Death penalty should be allowed

The position you basically want me to take is that there should be no death penalty, anywhere, anytime at all no matter the circumstances. I don't like it, but I will take it. Your position, if I have this correctly, is: The death penalty should be allowed implementation in certain circumstances. I expect objective reasoning and a good, well thought-out case. You can either make a few clarifications and start immediately (you'll also have to leave round 5 empty so that both you and I have the same number of rounds in total) or you can simply submit clarifications or acceptance of clarifications and have me start. Precautions: If CON trolls me for not defining the words within the resolution & my interpretation (such as making DNA -> Demonic Nambian Antelopes in a debate pertaining to DNA), then I expect a full 7-point vote from you, the voter.

Debater's Choice

This is my first debate so I am not as good as others but I must state that prison is a much better way of discipline than killing. You are taken away from your family, have to follow a strict regime and are in with a bunch of strangers. I am OK with that as at least you have a longer life and I think life is the most important thing in the world. Without life, you can't enjoy even the simplest of things. I agree that something must be take away from criminals, but life is too important to take away from anyone.

The death penalty should be allowed

Currently there are 3,425 people on Death Row. An incredible 4% are innocent. This totals to 123 people who will be killed, even though they are innocent. The Death Penalty should not be allowed for 3 reasons. 1- It is Morally Wrong 2- It is expensive 3- It is unconstitutional Rules: There will be 5 rounds. Introduction, Argument 1, Argument 2, Argument 3, Conclusion. Any personal attacks on the other debater will result in an instant disqualification. Any logical fallacies can be pointed out. Rebuttals are allowed, and in fact encouraged. Remember to cite your sources for each argument, and may the best man win!

Should we have the death Penalty? (Con is against death penalty)

I believe the death penalty is not the best way to solve all crimes but in some cases like mass murdering or kidnapping or something else. I do think that killing someone is not the first solution but if they get to live they should at least have some harsher punishments besides just jail because its not that bad. But the main reason i think the death penalty should be allowed is because if someone decided to do something as evil as a mass murdering they shouldn't just go to jail for a life time and get it over with it because its just not fair the American jail is not as hard as should be on certain prisoners for what they have done. I think that if you have the guts to go up and have the nerve to kill someone then you definitely don't deserve to still be living and breathing on this earth its just not right you need to learn from your mistakes and it will also teach others to learn from what you have done and be warned that if you decide to take this path in your life there will be serious consequences like the death penalty or harsher and stricter jails. People need to take the blame for what they have clearly done and its not right to kill and innocent person and still live and eat and live your life when them and their families have to suffer for what you have done. It also gives closure to the victims families who have suffered so deeply because of your cruel actions, and also i don't know if you've noticed but your justice system has more sympathy for our criminals than our victims. Another good reason to have the death penalty is because when a prisoner's parole or escape can give the criminals another opportunity to kill another person again. Also have you noticed with all these prisoners here and known of them getting killed its taking up space and that's not realty safe. And finally something we all have to pay attention almost everyday is our taxes did you know that we are paying to keep our criminals stuck in that jail place when it could be going to something a lot more useful that could actually help and benefit us. Overall i do agree with the death penalty but if there we some law that were to be passed that made the jails a bit more stricter and made them suffer more them i would also agree with that as well . Some people may call that mean or getting eye to eye which is also not the best way to solve things and i agree and here your point but its also not fair haven't you ever lost a loved one and if so just imagine the reason they died is because guy was just feeling angry and decided to kill someone that night and its also not only that is just that someone who had the mentality to do something like that clearly needs to get their facts straight and on the right track.

the death penalty should be allowed

I am going to argue for this topic. I believe that death penalty should be allowed in many countries if not all of them.

Death Penalty should be allowed

First debate, very excited! OK here I go: Everyone has the right to live, no ones life should be ended because someone decided that they should. The saying two wrongs don't make a right goes a very long way when it comes to topics like this. Human life is so valuable, that even murderers shouldn't be deprived of their life, even if they have killed someone. The death penalty is something that you can't take back, it is irreversible! Imagine killing someone and later on finding out that they are innocent. Texas man Cameron Todd Willingham, for example, was found innocent after his 2004 execution. Lastly, using the death penalty doesn't deter criminals, evidence says it does the complete opposite! Twenty seven years after abolishing the death penalty, Canada saw a 44 per cent drop in murders across the country. And it wasn't alone.

Capital Punishment Should Be Allowed

My opponent didn't actually outline a case against the death penalty.The death penalty isn't just about enacting revenge, as my opponent assumes. 1. The Death Penalty protects others from potentially being infringed upon in the future.2. The death penalty is an actual punishment. Prison is not. Some people will purposely get themselves into prison, just to survive off the government.3. Justice is not strictly about revenge. Due cause does not have to erase the bad things someone did, and it never will. It's about giving the criminal the same treatment they gave their victim to equivilate the crime to the punishment.4. Again, why just Australia? Should the Death Penalty be allowed everywhere else?

I feel that the death penalty should be implemented because there arebsome crimes which are just simply horrific and jail just does not suit as punishment.

Death Penalty

Should the death penalty be aloud in the United States? the answer is yes

The Death Penalty

I believe that the the death penalty should not be abolished.

The Death Penalty Should be Abolished

The death penalty should not be allowed for various reasons: 1. What makes it moral? Why do we kill people who kill people to show killing people is wrong? It is hypocritical. 2. It violates amendment 8 of the constitution which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, for sometimes it takes a victim longer then expected and wanted to pass. This makes the punishment inhumane and unconstitutional. 3. There is no solid evidence to prove that the death penalty deteriorates crime rates. So what is the point? If anything, it is an easy way out. 4. 1/7 people executed are innocent, why take the chance? 5. The cost of the death penalty is much greater then it would cost to give prisoners/victims life imprisonment. I will await for your rebuttals and then pose a counterargument against such rebuttals.

Death Penalty

In my opinion, I believe that if someone murders another person they should be killed too. Once again the 15th amendment supports this statement. Punishment should fit the crime because it is just (Danzig). The death penalty is not to cause someone pain, it is for justice. There are ways to execute criminals that are not always cruel such as a gas chamber and lethal injections (Bohm). Overall the death penalty has been a part of American culture for years, and I do not think it is fair to reconsider things now. If criminals commit inhuman crimes I believe the death penalty is the correct sentence.

The Death Penalty

Hello, and thanks for starting this debate! I will argue that the Death penalty should not be legal 'everywhere'. I assume that we will do arguments in round 2, then rebuttals and closing statements in round 3. Thanks!

the death penalty should be legalized everywhere

The United States should have death penalty for capital offenses, which include first-degree murder and treason. Don't hesitate to state your opinions but be respectful.

Death Penalty Ought to Be Legal for Capital Crimes

Extend arguments.

the death penalty should be allowed

Challenge accepted.

The Death Penalty should be made illegal in the USA.

I saw some people discussing this earlier and thought someone would at least consider trying to change my mind. I think the death penalty, or capital punishment, should not exist. Pro will obviously be arguing to keep the death penalty where it is already in place, or implement it in more regions. Please no semantics. Good luck!

The Death Penalty

The death penalty is something that should be allowed and utilized. If there is sufficient evidence to convict someone of a serious crime, they should not be able to appeal and re-appeal their case, costing millions of dollars per case, most of which, if not all, is paid by taxpayers. It is less of a financial burden to humanely kill those guilty of severe crimes, and it ensures they won't do it again. If the justice system can hold firm on ensuring that those who commit severe crimes are punished accordingly, it should serve as a deterrent to committing these crimes, as most people don't want to die.

The Death Penalty

I am against the death penalty because if the death penalty were to be implemented, you would have to be 100% certain that the victim is guilty of murder. This is rather difficult to obtain. for the paradox of unanimity, see So, if we cannot trust unanimous decisions, or non-unanimous decisions (as that would be less than 100% certainty), the death penalty should not be implemented.

Death Penalty

Extend arguments. I hope that Pro returns to the site, and that my harsh critisisms did not deter her from the debate.

the death penalty should be allowed

Closing StatementsMy closing statements will be short, as I feel I have covered almost everything, as well as Con forfeiting the last round. I hope to have been able to have shown why the death penalty should not be abolished, as well as provide reasons of why it should be allowed (to take away someone else's human rights is to forfeit your own). Con's entire case relied on one reason, and that reason was the death penalty being immoral. Con used that argument, but barely used any reasoning to show how it is immoral. Con also didn't rebut many of my arguments, as is apparent in the previous rounds. Again, I hope to have shown that the death penalty should not be abolished.

The Death Penalty

I believe that the death penalty should be abolished. Solitary confinement is a much better way to deal with criminals who are a threat to everyone around them.

The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished

I think the death penalty should remain in use. Many criminals when released from prison will be likely to commit a crime again. If you are convicted for murder, rape, genocide, treason, or a pedophile you should get the death penalty. You have already shown that you are not a law abiding citizen and there should be no reason to give you another chance to live again and possibly commit the same act. People who commit crimes such as rape or murder are usually not one time offenders. Also, just because some people believe that the death penalty is morally wrong does not mean everyone believes it is wrong. Why put someone away from life when there is a possibility of parole or someone can escape? Putting someone away from life makes our jails more crowded. With the right changes to the way the death penalty works, it can be helpful and useful to keep people who are sick and cannot be helped off of the streets.

The Death Penalty

The death penalty should be legal in all states across the United States considering some people commit crimes knowing they will get away with it. If the death penalty was implemented, those murderers might reconsider before committing the act.

Death penalty legalized in all states

The United Nations in 2008 banned the use of the death penalty, however fifty-eight countries, including the United States and China, still exercise the death penalty. As such, the topic remains highly controversial. I believe that some criminals lost their human faces while they made chain of serious crimes and there's no other punishment for them but death penalty.

Death penalty should be supported.

I am in favor of the death penalty. I believe that it is a proper form of law, effective punishment, and an appropriate way to serve justice. While I am in favor of the death penalty, I believe that it should also only be brought down on the convicted person under certain circumstances; severe ones, at that. Such as murder. The death penalty brings up an interesting axiom in life: An eye for and eye, and a tooth for a tooth. In this particular case, I'll take an eye...and maybe a tooth as well. I await your first rebuttal.

Death Penalty

In keeping with his rules: I accept the debate and will be arguing that states should be allowed to pursue the death penalty regardless of the plea of the defendant. (I did correct the typo in "regardless", which I hope Pro does not fault; which is not to give him crap about the typo, because I'm sure I'll make my own) Though this is an administrative round, I would also like to note that Pro has conceded in the comments that the death penalty is valid in principle, so that this debate will not hinge on that point.

States should not be allowed to pursue the death penalty for a criminal that pleas guilty

If someone commits a murder, then yes, they do deserve to be punished. But think of it this way, death it the easy way out. Would you rather have a life sentence in prison, or die? What about the family of the victim? Many people assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty to be imposed, but it isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral ground. Then there is the worst thing about the death penalty: Errors The system can make tragic mistakes. There have been many unfortunate people that have been killed, and later on been proved innocent. We'll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn't commit.

Capital Punishment Should Be Allowed

My opponent stated "A more recent study by Kenneth Land of Duke University and others concluded that, from 1994 through 2005, each execution in Texas was associated with "modest, short-term reductions" in homicides, a decrease of up to 2.5 murders."The issue with this statistic is that it is looking at only one state. Over all, when you compare all states without the death penalty, and those with it, those without the death penalty, on average, have a lower murder rate. There of course can be exceptions to this rule, such as Texas. Next my opponent used an article from daily signal. As you can read about here[10], they are known to have a strong right wing bias as well as having a "mixed" reporting record. Meaning, that some of the things they report on are simply not even true. Given that the article doesn't even cite the study they claim that they got the information from, it is very suspect.I thank my opponent for this debate, and wish them luck in future debates. To conclude, I believe that the reasons I mentioned above, how there can be innocent people who are given the death penalty, how the death penalty is more expensive(as my opponent conceded) and that life in prison without parole seems to be a better deterrent to murder than the death penalty, I believe it makes sense not to allow the death penalty. Sources:[10] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com...

Death penalty should be allowed

I think death penalty should be approved in every single prision that exists in the world. Criminals need to pay for what they did, and also they need to be punished, because the crime they are acused of is something that is very serious.

Death penalty

I think the death penalty should be abolished because even though they are criminals they have rights to and the constitution says they have a right to life liberty and justice if they are killed that abuses there rights because they are stripped of their life right

should the death penalty exist

Resolution: The death penalty should never be allowed as a form of punishment. capital punishment  –noun punishment by death for a crime; death penalty.

Death Penalty

Looking for a serious intellectual debate on this topic here. I had a long and very interesting conversation with a friend about this and would like to see how my arguments stand up here. R1) Introduction of argument R2) Main body of argument R3) Cross examination of opponent's argument R4) Defence of own argument R5) Conclusion of argument I will first define the debate as a whole. I, as the Proposition, take it upon myself to prove that the Death Penalty (that is to say the state-sponsored execution of a convicted criminal) is a morally acceptable punishment to the very worst crimes where the perpetrator is likely to reoffend. I am going to argue this on 3 main points: 1. Establishing whether there can be circumstances in which the death penalty is justifiable and if so what are they? 2. The death penalty as a preventative measure against repeat offenders rather than as a punishment I will lay these out in this first round and from there expand on and defend my position in future rounds. I'd like to thank any challenger in advance for accepting. My burden of proof is only to show that certain crimes should warrant the death penalty, and I will be examining why in later rounds. I'll look at concepts like the human rights of the convict and why human rights aren't inalienable. I want this to be a competently argued debate that focusses on the philosophical side of the issue. Thanks in advance.

The Death Penalty

I accept and will be arguing the death penalty should not be in place. I have actually never debated this.Good luck to pro :)

Death Penalty

First I would like to apologies for forfeiting one of the rounds. It was out of my hands. So let me start. Let us first picture a world without death penalty. Well, I see crime rates as high as ever, murders increasing everyday and innocent people not getting their rights back. Chaos roams the streets and people committing crimes to get money and in their heads they know that the worst that can happen to them is prison. For some prison might even be a relief compared to their living standards. So abolishing death penalty only encourages people to break the law and murder more innocent people. More gangs would form and assassinations increase because of the lower punishment received. Right now, some countries that have death penalty are very fragile. The only line between chaos and peace is death penalty. Some might say the cost of killing a criminal is not worth it. Well let me tell you one thing, is the cost of safety not worth it? Would you rather have a peaceful community and pay some extra taxes or would you rather pay less tax and live in a dangerous environment. One of the issues of death penalty is making a mistake in the trails. No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all the time. Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof. We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. However, the risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death penalty cases is very small, and there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976. Therefore I believe that all the points provided by my opponent are weak and are not strong enough to outweigh the advantages to death penalty.

Death Penalty should be allowed

Should the United States of America go ahead and legalize the death penalty in all 50 states?

The death penalty.

For some, the death penalty could be less worse than jail. The death penalty is only used when absolutely needed, and sometimes it is the only rational/moral option. Even if a criminal was released from the death penalty/jail, it would be very hard for them to make a living. The death penalty can be painless. The death penalty provides disclosure for victims. If the death penalty is not in use, then America will end up spending more money trying to contain criminals from the outside world. Many lives could be saved by each execution of a guilty killer.

The Death Penalty should be legal in all US states.

The death penalty should be legal in all US states.

My argument for the death penalty is very simple. I do not hold that it deters crime. I do not hold that "it's what they deserve" (which is very difficult to prove). Simply my position on this issue stems from the fact capital punishment is dealing with a person who is capable of premeditated, cold-blooded rape or murder. In the event of an escape or parole for this individual we are turning a proven killer lose on the public. This should be prevented at all costs, and as extreme as putting someone to death is it is the only foolproof solution to the problem. (I noticed your rather lackluster debate on the subject and was wondering if you want to give it another shot.)

The Death Penalty Should Be Continued.

It is believed that keeping harsh punishments like death penalty conduce to fear in the would-be murderer's mind pertaining to their future on being caught. If people know they will only face life-imprisonment, they will take the legal system casually and commit all the crimes they want. This increases the rate of homicides. By instilling death penalty in the legal system, people will not dare to murder that easily. Thus, death penalty is considered as an essential tool to fight premeditated murder. Since life is so precious, the punishment for taking somebody's life is paying the price with your own life. Thus, death penalty is nothing but just punishment for those who have taken another individual or individuals lives. Keeping the death penalty will scare people even more into not committing the crime.

The death penalty should be banned from a form of punishment.

I believe that the death penalty is unconstitutional, and that it should be made illegal in the United States. That pretty much sums it up

The death penalty should be unconstitutional

This is a debate sent to my good friend Kylar, since I saw on his profile that he believes that the death penalty should exist, while I do not.Resolved: The death penalty should exist in the United States.The onus is shared between the two of us, I must prove that we should not have the death penalty whereas my opponent must prove that we should have it. My reasoning for the sharing of the onus is because both sides call for a change in the status quo in the US.Rules:1. No forfeiting2. No semantics/trolling/kritiks/etc3. My opponent must start their constructive case this round and waive the final round saying "Round waived in accordance to rule 3" or something similar4. Keep appropriate conduct5. Do not reject definitions/structure or anything otherwise laid out in this debate. If you reject please do so in comments or PM so I can address it.Structure:Round X: What pro does | what con doesR1: Create debate | Provide constructive caseR2: Provide constructive case | RebuttalsR3: Rebuttals | Defense to rebuttalsR4: Defense to rebuttals | WaiveVoter ELO is set to 2500. If needed I can change this.Votes are on a pick winner basis so we can get more in depth RFD's as opposed to just explaining specific points.Definitions:Death penalty: the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime.should: ought to; mustexist: be in practice/be made into practice

The death penalty should exist

In the case of capital murder and life destroying sexual crimes, the death penalty should be allowed, as it is a powerful deterrent and, if the criminal takes it upon themselves to take control of the life of another and ruin it/ take it, the state/federal government should reserve the power to do so as well.

Use of the Death Penalty as punishment for capital murder and sex crimes.

I believe that even though people say that nobody has the right to kill someone else, that there has to be personal justice and peace of mind. There is an extent on how someone can receiving capital punishment though, and the worst the crime, the better chances are that that specific person should be put to death. I just believe a personal peace of mind, and how that could lead to justice in some form to the person that that human has corrupted. This depends on seriousness of the crime that person has committed. If a person lied and was put to jail, this is not that serious. So, he would not deserve the death penalty. The death penalty should only be for serial murderers and people who commit very serious crimes.

We should abolish the death penalty in the US

I accept.

The Death Penalty should be legal

I believe that the death penalty should be abolished in every state of America. 1. The death penalty is morally wrong and it contradicts the entire point of putting someone in prison in the first place. ( To learn from their mistakes and become better people. 2. In States where the Death Penalty is in place, murder rates are actually higher than those where there is no Death Penalty. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... 3. In some cases it is cheaper to sentence a person to life imprisonment, than to sentence them with death. (Court Costs) 4. More tax is needed to maintain the Death Penalty. 5. There is a chance that the lethal injection will be administered in the wrong order, or there will be something that goes wrong with during the process. This can cause the prisoner to feel the pain that comes with the lethal injection. 6. In a lot of cases that are sent to the supreme court, it depends more on the attorney that you have been appointed ( Most offenders do not have one so they are appointed one by the system ) than the actual crime you have committed. I look forward to this debate.

The Death penalty should be abolished in all states of America.

I am looking for someone to give a reasonable explanation(s) and arguments on why he or she feels that the death penalty should remain legalized in certain areas of the United States. Therefore, I will be arguing on why I do not agree with the death penalty. For this 1st round I am asking for acceptance, 2nd-4th round going deeper into the argument, and the 5th round should be the final conclusion. This is only my second debate and compared to my last argument, I know this is going to be even more controversial, so, I'm not quite sure what to expect. First off, let me introduce myself. My name is Destinee Bayona and I'm an 18 year old freshman attending William Paterson University in New Jersey and majoring in Psychology. As a requirement for my Philosophy class I am taking, and for 15% of my overall grade, I must complete 3 debates throughout the semester, with this being my second so far. Each debate must be a maximum of 3,000 characters, for 5 rounds, and must be completed by April 1st. Also, absolutely NO copying and pasting. If you are going to speak on your opinion, let it be YOUR own thoughts. I have a lot to say so I look forward to this debate :)

The Death Penalty Should Be Illegal.

The Death Penalty Should Be Illegal.

I believe the death penalty should be abolished. I think that killing someone is never the solution, no matter what crime they've committed. People might say that a murder should receive the death penalty because the punishment is equal to the crime, but "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind". There are alternative punishments that I believe still serve justice but promote a more forgiving and merciful attitude in society.

Death Penalty should be Abolished in all States

It is important to note they the state does not execute people for the benefit of the family. However, I don't see how the extended process prior to the executions are agonizing since they are serving the rest of their life in prison until execution, and if there was no execution then they would just stay in prison. Christianity is accepting of capital punishment most notably mentioned in Genesis 9:6 [1]. Even if they are mentally ill they still committed a capital crime such as murder or treason and should be punished. Further, people can plead insanity, and also it is unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded [2]. The death penalty should be allowed because it does save lives, it gives proper retribution, and it serves justice. Sources [1] http://biblehub.com... [2] http://www.oyez.org...

Capital Punishment Should Be Allowed

The death penalty should not be considered an option when issuing sentences to a criminal. No matter what their crime may be (murder, rape, etc..) no one deserves to die, and more importantly no one has the right to take a life away from someone else. By issuing the death penalty, you are contradicting the claim that murder is wrong. But in all actuality, you are murdering the person that committed the crime. Punishing violence with violence does not solve anything. It is extremely hypocritical. Plus, jail time can either serve as the worst punishment of all, forcing the criminal to sit and ponder over what he/she has done, or it can serve as a time of repentance and change the person as a whole. If you are for the death penalty, please inform me on your reasoning and beliefs. I would really like to see the other side of the argument.

Death Penalty

People who are threats to the innocent should be stopped but putting them into prison doesn't really solve what they did to the innocent not only that but it cost, 760,000 a year . They shouldn't be allowed to live if they killed someone. They should get what they deserve. It's just like the golden rule . " treat others the way you want to be treated". If you kill someone, then you should get punished for your actions.

Death penalty should be allowed

Yes the taxpayer money is more important than the life of a murderer, Yes. That is why he should be on the death row, As he does not DESERVE to keep on living in society. Yes but that's just the court case, Not all the decades the murderer spends in jail.

the death penalty should be completely abolished, No exceptions

Thank you, nargiz_gab, for initializing the debate. I accept and will be arguing that the death penalty ought not be supported. I request that for the second round we each advance our arguments in support of our respective positions and that for round three, the final round, we counter argue the each other's argument in the previous round in addition to summarizing our respective positions thereby concluding the debate. I invite nargiz_gab to advance his argument as to why the death penalty ought to be supported.

Death penalty should be supported.

Yes people don't believe it but you have to have faith but that's besides the point. I My next claim | this is what you would say. \/ There are more pros to the death penalty than cons. Yes people can get wrongly executed One of the arguments of opponents of death penalty is the inevitability of sending innocent people who are wrongly accused to death row and eventually execution. In relation to free will, some criminals are suffering from mental illness or are having clouded judgment at the time of the crime.Opponents contend that there are instances where people commit pre-meditated crimes and are aware of what they are doing. However, it does not discount the fact that crimes can also be committed out of passion or extreme anger triggered by a situation which makes an offender act on impulse. There are also those who are suffering from mental illnesses and are not taking medication which can lead to them committing offenses they have no control of. It is an added cost to the government and taxpayers" money, With the argument that life imprisonment with no parole is more expensive, opponents say that in general, the government spends more taxpayers" money in handling cases of death row inmates. This is due to the length and complexity of trials, the number or defenders to be hired and the overall process. They contend that there are two trials the state will spend for. One is for the verdict and another for the sentencing, not including the number of appeals that will be submitted while keeping the convicted prisoner inside maximum security. Death penalty is a form of revenge, While proponents say that imposing capital punishment is a form of retribution, that is, to punish who has committed a crime, opponents argue that it is revenge. For the latter, to avenge a crime committed to another individual may be understandable but killing someone for murdering another person is also unconstitutional. It is crime in itself that is only masked by the term capital punishment and in truth, only continues the series of violence. It is a platform that is anti-poor and discriminatoryand Those who are death row inmates and sentenced to death are mostly based on racial discrimination as evidenced by a high percentage of inmates being African-American and members of the minority. Moreover, accused individuals who are poor are mostly the ones who get the death penalty for the reason that they lack the finances to seek for great and powerful defense attorneys. They don"t have the money to pay for good defense. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This is my info -Death penalty costs the government less as opposed to life imprisonment without parole.Proponents say despite expenses incurred by the government from imposing capital punishment, death penalty is still cheaper compared to the costs of life without parole. Although there is no contention that the cost of the former is high, life imprisonment is accumulatively higher given the expenses for food, health care and other costs of sustaining the lives of incarcerated individuals serving life. -It deters would-be criminals to commit felonies and Advocates of death penalty cite examples on how imposing the death sentence or abolishing it have affected crime rate. According to a study conducted in the late 1960"s, there was a 7% crime rate increase on the years when this law was abolished. On the other hand, fewer crimes were committed with the increase in number of inmates in the death row who were executed each year. Proponents say that these figures clearly indicate the efficacy of capital punishment on deterring crimes. - The absence of death penalty is synonymous to crime rate increase.As reported by time magazine, an estimated 2,000,000 people in the United States have been victims of crimes, from assault to murder. With insufficient laws to address this problem or the lack of teeth in these laws, criminals become careless and bolder to commit heinous crimes because of the leniency in punishments and loop holes in the justice system. For these reason, there is a need for death penalty. -It is constitutional and does not violate the Eight Amendment which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, fines and cruel and unusual punishments, including torture. Advocates of death penalty say that the pain associated with the execution of a death row inmate is not improbable. Even the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the Eight Amendment challenge which stated that the drug used to render the criminal coma-like unconscious before injecting the lethal drug is not capable to do so completely. The Supreme Court was firm on its stand that any method of execution definitely will inflict some pain and states with capital punishment have already adopted more humane methods to carry out executions. -Death penalty is a just punishment for crimes committed against the rights to life, freedom and safety of victims. It is the right of an individual to live peacefully and be free from harm. Unfortunately, crimes like murder, rape and assault are committed by perpetrators who have no regard for life and property of others. Since they violate other people"s lives, it is but fair that they are brought to justice and suffer the fate they rightfully deserve. People who are for capital punishment also talk about free will wherein an individual is given the right to do things in his or her own volition and he or she is responsible for his or her own fate. All of this shows that it is constitutional, and it would make the victim get peace or have freedom. What would you want the judge to say if you or a loved one got killed, or maybe your whole family except for you that no has to suffer from what happened? Please answer.

Death penalty should be allowed

I feel that the death penalty should be abolished.

death penalty

I believe the death penalty shouldn't go anywhere. If a person has committed a capital crime such as murder, Treason, Or crimes against humanity, They don't deserve to live. It costs the government less money to give someone the capital punishment than to give them life in prison. It arguably deters crime, Since most criminals would be less likely to commit a crime if it meant death.

The Death Penalty Should be Abolished

I believe the death penalty is a cruel and inhumane decision and will result in more, not less, murders and murderers including the government. I am not saying we should let these killers roam free but that we should give them a punishment that is reversible if the presumed killer is the wrong person such as a lifetime sentence and community service. Remember, if a person is framed or wrongly accused we have, therefore, killed an innocent life we can not get back. If we are giving such a punishment as a lifetime sentence the wrong accused can walk out and get their life back, pretty much, unharmed. I would like to thank the opponent although I was hoping to see an argument from you. Hopefully I might see on in this final round. Thank you to all those reading this and whom are going to vote and, please, if I have convinced you the death penalty is wrong vote con!!!

There should be death penalty for murderers.

I accept! Good luck bro. I agree no personal attacks on other player (Ad Hominem) I will offer no rebuttals so it is a fair debate.

Although the death penalty has been banned in most states, I believe that there are boundaries to a crime, and if crossed, there should be a more severe punishment then life in prison. Act all sweet and nice and they'll have time off for good behavior. If you live long enough, you'll walk among us again. I don't want that. Do you?

Should the Death Penalty be Reinstated in the United States

The death penalty is a form of punishment in which the person who commited a certain heinous crime is put to death. Currently, Texas is for the death penalty. Huntsville, Texas is the only prison, at this time, that actually puts the inmates to death. The death penalty needs to remain legal in Texas.

The death penalty should be legal in Texas.

Resolution: The Death Penalty should remain a sentencing option in the United States. First Round will be for Acceptance. If there are any questions, please ask them before joining.

Death Penalty

I challenge my friend Kryptic to this debate.Resolved: The death penalty should exist in the United States.Kryptic and I both share the onus, which is that I must prove that the death penalty should not exist whereas my opponent must prove it should. Whoever has more convincing/sound arguments wins this debate. We are both advocating for a change in the status quo in at least some areas of the US, so the onus is logically shared.Rules:1. Maintain appropriate conduct2. No trolling/kritiks/semantics/forfeits/etc.3. Start in round one with arguments and waive the final round with something along the lines of "round waived in compliance with rule 3"4. Keep debate structureDefinitions:Death penalty: the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime. should: ought to; mustexist: continue to be in policy or come into policy Round structure:Round X: What con does | What pro doesR1: Outline debate | Constructive argumentsR2: Constructive arguments | RebuttalsR3: Rebuttals | Defense to rebuttalsR4: Defense to rebuttals | WaiveIf you want me to change anything let me know. Thanks!

The death penalty should exist.

I believe the death penalty is acceptable. I believe this based on 3 major reasons. 1. If you take another persons life without an acceptable reason why should you be allowed to continue your own? 2. Even though the death penalty may be expensive it gives a sense of closure for the victims family. 3. Also instead of just ending the inmates life, you force him/her to live the rest of his/her life in a cell. I believe this to be like caging an animal and waiting for it to die. This is inhumane and cruel. Best of luck. Lets have a good debate.

The Death Penalty should be illegal

This debate is on whether or not society should have the death penalty. Now I believe the death penalty is accepted under curtain circumstances like serial rapist, serial killers, mass murders and if the suspect is not insane and/or is atleast 19+ years old. The first round is a introduction round. The debate should start in round 2. There are 4 rounds in total, voting period is 1 week, time to argue is 48 hours and argument max is 6,000 characters. Also another thing before we get started is if you say "life sentencing" it would be assumed that you mean imprisonment until death by old age. The reason why I state this is because in Canada life imprisonment = 25 years maximum.Definitionsserial rapist: sexually assault 2 or more peopleserial killer: Murder 3 or more people with a time interval between one of the murders. For example Ted Bundy, John Gacy, ect...mass murderer: Murder 3 or more people with no time interval between any of the murders. For example James Holmes.Rules No TrollingNo ProfanityCiting your sources is optional unless the your opponent ask for it.My opponent is able to add any definitions or rules however can't change any of the definitions/rules already listed.

The death penalty should be accepted under curtain circumstances

I will accept this challenge, although I am not staunch in my opposition to this punishment. That is, the punishment by killing. Perhaps this discussion shall help to stiffen my argumentation in the matter. I don't know. But I want to thank my debate partner for proposing this discussion. I am looking forward to it.

This is going to be a long debate. There will be 5 rounds. My opponent is TejreticsStructure1. Acceptance2. Arguments3. Arguments4. Rebuttals, Defending Case5, ConclusionNote: You cannot start your arguments in the 1,4, and 5 round. You can't rebut in the 1,5 rounds. You can rebut in the 3rd and 2nd round though. Rules1. No forfeits2. No trolling4. Over 2500 ELO to accept.5. Over age 13 unless you are tejretics or famousdebater.6. Over 3000 ELO to vote. 7. Have fun!Definitions1. Death Penalty: The practice or legal sanction of allowing the imposition of punishment of death for people convicted of certain crimes.Legal: of or relating to the lawSources1. http://www.merriam-webster.com...2. http://www.thefreedictionary.com... Thank you. Thanks to tejretics.

The Death Penalty should be legal

Death Penalty should be abolished

I accept! May the best debater win C:

The death penalty should be legalized

I agree; Canada should allow the death penalty as a punishment for capital crimes.

Canada should allow death penalty as the punishment for capital crimes

I'll accept the challenge on the death penalty. I will now state why I believe that the death penalty shouldn't be brought back. The death penalty could be used to kill people who haven't committed the crime. There has been some cases where they kill the man, then later come to find that he never committed the crime. In my opinion this solution is just far too permanent for something that may not be 100% sure.

Death Penalty

1. Worse sentence"Few convicted murderers sentenced to life in prison declare years later that they wish they had been sentenced instead to death and executed. Few if any death row prisoners refuse clemency if it is offered to them." [1]. They fear death more than life in prision. 2. Mistakes"there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976" [2]. There are some doubt in cases like in Willingham's case, but he was not aquitted. The death penalty deters criminals meaning it saves lives. When we fail to execute a murderer we are effectively valuing the murder's life higher than that of the person who might spare though the deterrent effect of their execution. If even one innocent person is saved through the deterrent effect of executing a murder, who has given up their right to life when they take a life, the execution of that murderer is justified.Sources[1] http://goo.gl...[2] http://goo.gl...

Capital Punishment Should Be Allowed

The Death Penalty should remain legal in the U.S.. I will let my opponent start it off.

Death Penalty

I think that the Death Penalty should stay. I do not believe that it is right to let a murderer stay in prison living off of tax dollars for the rest of his life. I believe that the penalty should only be used on people they have hard evidence on so they can avoid executing the wrong person. If the death penalty stayed, there would be less crimes in and outside of jail. Criminals would be afraid to kill someone fearing for their lives. Does anyone object?

The death Penalty should still stand.

I think that the death penalty should only be used in extreme situations.

Capital Punishment should not be legal.