I haven't been on much lately so I decided I would post my own topic. I don't believe this topic has been done recently since I checked the stickied thread with topics. I will state my reasons on why I believe the death penalty should be put in place for all murderers. It is fine if you disagree but let's make this a good and clean debate. Don't just say "You are wrong." Alright, well here I go.
1) I will start off by saying that the death penalty (that is only for mass murderers) was recently stopped because they said the method was too painful. So, someone who brutally murdered one or more people should die besides feeling the same pain? Where is the justice in that? I believe that you should get what you give. If you do good deeds, then you should be rewarded nicely. If you kill someone, you should be killed.
2) The next part I will go into is jail. Oh yes, we make jail seem like the worst place possible. Bed, toilet, workout room, safety, and 3 square meals per day. Now, safety is different in different jails. I know that so it can't exactly be supported. However, why do we give them a workout room or some sort of a place to lift weights? I am curious to this. Okay, so we are making rapists stronger and making it easier for them to rape when they get out. Why do they need 3 square meals per day? I went to a soup kitchen last year and I almost cried at how many homeless walked in because they didn't have anything to eat. We are treating criminals better than people who never harmed anyone. Where is the justice in that? Don't tell me the homeless made bad choices because it can happen to anyone. Also, bad choices? What about the person who chose to kill someone? I think that angers me the most. Really, jail looks like heaven to some people so they hurt someone else.
3) I will go into the issue of money. It costs us around $30,000 per year to take care of ONE convict. Now, I am just supporting the death penalty for murderers. The people who never harmed anyone are taking care of people who killed other people. What is wrong with this picture? We are taking care of them instead of the poor who never hurt people. That money could go to so many good issues like cures and health care. I will say the green movement just for you, Carlie. Anyways, now you will say it costs too much to use the death penalty. I think we should kill the murderer the exact same way the murderer killed someone else. This leads me into my next point.
4) Can you imagine going through the pain of being killed? Let's take it through the victim's point of view. Can you imagine the torture of what happened before you died? The pain would be terrible if the murderer stabbed the victim 100 times. I know the victim would die before that but it shows a point. That is why I believe the murderer should be killed the same way. Let them feel what it is like to go through that. Now, let's take it through the family's point of view. Your relative was just murdered. Now, be honest, what would you like to happen to the person that killed them? You would most likely want them dead which is why the death penalty should be put in place.
5) I know we can't be 100% sure of who the murderer was. However, DNA is 99.99% so very close. Also, why would their DNA even be on the victim or around the scene of the crime? They most likely had something to do with it. That makes them eligible to receive the death penalty. Also, the people we are not sure of can be put in jail. Jails are over filling so criminals are being released earlier then their original sentences. I know this because my aunt was released about a year before her sentence was completely served.
I will state my final words. I want to make it even more clear that the death penalty should only be given to murderers. The other criminals can be put in jail. The murderer should feel the same pain the victim did. Rotting in jail is a bunch of bull. Yes, to some it is crap while it is heaven to others. Why are we paying for murderers to have a life with food and beds? You would want the murderer of your family member dead. You would not just say they can go to jail. DNA is not exact but it is only .01% possibly wrong. That is pretty darn good. You may say two wrongs don't make a right but that makes no sense at all. So, if someone cheats on a test and is given a failing grade for cheating...would you say that then? The same applies to the death penalty. The death penalty is simply a consequence for their actions.
I would love to debate someone on this issue but please read my whole post before posting. It makes the debate more enjoyable if you post your feelings to each of my points and then state your final words. Thanks and also keep it on topic.
I say yes to the death penalty, I think that they should use it more often on life setences. It would clear up some space in the prisons and the people weren't going to be getting out anyway.
Well then, do you think you could be the executioner? Could you do everything that you're suggesting, because honestly if you can't who are you to ask other to do the same (Dentists have one of the highest suicide rates possibly because they feel they cause pain to others, what do you think the rates would be like for a profession that tortured and killed others?) and if you truly think you can I would question whether your psychological state is any better then most serial killers.
Furthermore, as I've said earlier and you seem to have ignored, in the United States it's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life then to execute them. On that thread, who are you to say that the families of the victims should have to go through with countless appeals and trials, all of which they will have to attend as witnesses putting them through huge amount of psychological strain as opposed to just having one or two trials and then sending the murderer to jail for life where they wouldn't be able to hurt them or anyone else for that matter.
Even besides that point what about the families of victims that have forgiven the murderer? There are such people, and just because a few are too petty to understand that doesn't mean that we have to execute all criminals. Besides that point, if you do execute the criminals you can actually deny psychological healing to many victims as in many types of psychological recovery confronting and overcoming you're fear/problem/challenge are all important steps towards ultimate recovery.
On top of that, I want to know how you would deal with manslaughter? Are you also following an off with their heads approach for the 'criminals' who accidentally killed someone (such as a car accident) and then turned themselves in?
Sorry for the jumble that this is in, but I just woke up and saw all of this to reply to =D
I am sure there are people out there who would be more than willing to kill someone who murdered another. If there are not enough people, I already stated the death pill would be fine. I just think the same death method would prevent these violent murders.
I never ignored that. I showed facts and you just put up opinions. The family should be able to decide if they want the murderer put in jail for life or just killed. I know if someone killed a person in my family, I would want that murderer dead. How about that, SuperShort? The family gets to decide what happens. They can either deal with the court to make sure that person NEVER harms someone else or they can choose to send them to jail without dealing with the court.
We already talked about manslaughter, buddy. Manslaughter is not a degree of murder. That person would serve their time in jail and then they can go.
TotalReview, that's not true at all, and you know it. I haven't seen a single citation from you yet, so everything that you've posted so far is only your opinion, but I suppose that you're right that what I'm saying is opinion too, so I think that I should do something to remedy that.
I said that the death penalty costs more then life in prison, here's a source backing that up (), and by the way those are government studies, good luck disproving them without any evidence.
If you want to see that not all families of victims want the murderer to die then feel free to check this out (). And on top of that why are you saying that we should listen to the victims family and not our justice system in the first place?
Well there you go, there are the facts, many more then you've given anyway, feel free to try and refute them and remind me if I missed anything, I'm sure I can find it again to present to you.
Wow, I will put the pros and cons of death penalty and let's see how they match up. I got some information from [url=http://youdebate.com/DEBATES/death_penalty.HTM?survey] .
Pros *Convict can't murder again *Convict has positive to murder again *Lowers just violent murder count *In 1999, 70% of people supported death penalty *Jails don't overfill *Other prisoners are not released early *Possibly help victim/family
Cons *Money could be an issue *Error of killing innocent *Does not exactly lower total murder count *Possibly hurt victim/family
I think we are pretty much at a standstill. The pros and cons sort of even out. I do think we should still try the death penalty more. Also, I was saying let the victim's family choose once the murderer is proven guilty. Justice is still served. It just allows the family to choose which method would be best whether it be prison or death.
It's actually the other way around, if you implement a death penalty in the U.S. over prison for life sentences each state that does so loses millions a year.
It's actually the other way around, if you implement a death penalty in the U.S. over prison for life sentences each state that does so loses millions a year.
Based on appeals and such. Then again, think about it like this. If a convict gets out and kills again, that would mean a lot more court time compared to the death penalty in the first place.
Based on appeals and such. Then again, think about it like this. If a convict gets out and kills again, that would mean a lot more court time compared to the death penalty in the first place.
That's true, however the point of life in prison is to mean that they don't get back out at all.
That's true, however the point of life in prison is to mean that they don't get back out at all.
Well, if they call a hit on someone which is pretty easy now a days even if you are in jail. It would require them to go to court which costs more money.
No, when their in jail they presumably don't have access to their bank so they couldn't pay for a hit, and if they were calling in favors from people loyal enough to kill for somebody that is never going to be free again then they obviously have enough power to call hits when they were outside. Thus why would they have killed someone themselves rather then call a hit and avoid immediate implication?
