Debate: Do you agree with the Death Penalty?
Side: Yes! Kill for punishment!

this makes no sense. the criminals actions and reasons determine what is evil? then it is not evil as they would never say it was. we as society, as a whole have determined that murder is illegal, and we place judges in their positions to determine the legitimacy of the claim that a killing was self defense, or murder, etc.If their actions have a negative impact on others who themselves don't do something as negative to others, then they are bad/evil.As a whole has been decided that murder, that killing someone without a justifiable reason, is wrong. The law says it is illegal and the law could easily say killing fish for food is also illegal. Laws can be, and in many cases are, wrong.fixing laws that have a permanent solution, by making more laws only causes more problems.No, not making more laws. Replacing the flawed one's with new and corrected ones, and perhaps add more detail to them.until we are able to drink a magic potion that gives us the ability to never make a mistake, to never convict an innocent person to deathThe further it goes the more mistakes are made, the more we learn from them, and eventually we should get to a point where the coming mistakes are foreseen and predicted with precision and thus prevented.you have to set aside the idea that it is ok to take a life in the name of the state.Taking someone's life in the name of a state is idiotic. A life may be taken if it is detrimental to others (assuming the others are toward "good"), and in some rare cases to humanity as a whole.you are correct in that retribution has punishment in its meaning, perhaps i should have used the word vengeance instead.It has both vengeance and punishment in its meaning. Seems more like a mix of both.locking people up is a punishment and not a waste of resources.It is a waste of resources if they don't compensate for the resources used on them. forced labor is slavery, which is another crime in itself.It is, if the person put to slavery has done nothing to deserve it. In case of murderers this is not the case. They may not be kept in freedom, and keeping them simply locked up when they don't compensate for it is a waste of resources. Resources that largely come from taxes, taxes from the people who suffered in the hands of the criminals. Thus death, or slavery. They chose to kill someone, thus choosing a path for themselves. it is not totally outside the realm of possibility that a person can become a better member of society through a rehabilitation process while incarcerated.In some cases. When that person had a rough childhood and has had a bad influence, for example, and can see it and correct oneself.You cannot lump every "bad" crime into the same pile.I don't. That was what I meant with, "Not who but what. Their actions. And why they did it."If you had to work a double shift every day at work to support your family and you fell asleep behind the wheel on the way home from sheer exhaustion, then you accidentally ran over a child because you had drifted off, should you be placed into the same category as someone who walked into a convenient store and shot a clerk? of course not. BUT when you look at the reason behind both examples it may come down to an economic insecurity. you working double shifts to support your family / the other person committing the robbery in order to support theirs. should you both be killed for your parts in another persons death?Both cases clearly depict that the government system is very flawed. Government should be able to provide a safe and secure environment for its people, even if it meant providing only the essentials (a place, food, hygiene, clothes), something that is not so in many cases. And yet they waste so much on the military and on elections and themselves. They don't care about the people, as long as they don't rebel against them in full force.and yes there would always be some that would never get out of prison due to the heinous nature of their crimes, but even in that isnt it the more humane way to go to try to learn why they are the way they are so that we can help prevent future problems instead of throwing them on the fires of our revenge?That was covered in, "although there could be some ways to use them".but it does say something to the fact that if countries who are supposedly beneath the u.s. have said that it is no longer useful, there must be something to it.US is not a smart country. It might have been once but is no longer.