Resolved: The US should abolish the death penalty
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 7 votes and with 39 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Structure
R1: Opening statements
R2: Rebuttals
R3: Defense
R4: Close
- Should: used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.
- Abolish: formally put an end to (a system, practice, or institution).
- Death penalty: the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime.
When the government metes out vengeance disguised as justice, it becomes complicit with killers in devaluing human life and human dignity. In civilized society, we reject the principle of literally doing to criminals what they do to their victims: The penalty for rape cannot be rape, or for arson, the burning down of the arsonist's house. We should not, therefore, punish the murderer with death.
- A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million). Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration (median cost $740,000).
- In Tennessee, death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.
- In Maryland death penalty cases cost 3 times more than non-death penalty cases, or $3 million for a single case.
- In California the current system costs $137 million per year; it would cost $11.5 million for a system without the death penalty.
The amount of waste that could be solved by switching to a life-without parole sentence, which is what I would favor, eliminates the inordinate amount of wasted funds that are not benefitting the people. Remember, we only promote the general welfare by using our funds to pose tangible benefits to the people. If alternatives are available that safeguard the public, we should pursue those instead. Moreover, by keeping people in jail instead of killing them, we have more time to commute their sentence if they are innocent.
Lynched Last DP:
SupaDudz - Town - Vanilla
Died in the Night:
Lunatic - Town - Vanilla
Graveyard:
SupaDudz - Town - Vanilla
Lunatic - Town - Vanilla
Living Players:
- Drafterman
- Speedrace
- WaterPhoenix
- GreyParrot
- irontoaster
- Virtuoso
Full forfeit. Con does not provide a relevant argument.
Cons argument for the death penalty is primarily an emotional appeal in light of the recent tragedy which befell our late friend Lunatic. However cons very argument also shows the darker side of the death penalty as it is currently applied, as the death penalty was applied the previous DP and how did that turn out? The one who was lynched flipped town.
Must we answer one tragedy by creating another?
tencharacters
full forfeit THATS POOR CONDUCT
Full forfeit. Atrocious conduct on Con's part.
Full forfeit.
Thanks =)
LOL! I love your RFD
Oops. Thought I was awarding penalties ;)
I think you cast your vote for the wrong side
First oromagi, now PressF4Respect. I'm beginning to think the key to winning debates is to copy/paste mafia analysis into them.
you guys playing mafia without me?
I apologize for this silly mistake lol
To make it up, I will provide both opening arguments and rebuttals in the next round
If we let the murderer live, we can take their blood and that can save hundreds of more lives per murderer. So lets abolish the death penalty.
"Rapists don't get raped."
The stupidest thing a proponent of no death penalty can say. They're right, rapists don't get raped, just like murderers don't get murdered. That's right, you heard me right, MURDERERS DON'T GET MURDERED UNDER THE DEATH PENALTY. We do not murder murderers, rather we KILL them. It's murder vs. kill, there is a big difference and too few people know what it is.
I used to support the death penalty, but I favor life in jail without parole and the convict must donate blood every 3 months to save more lives. They killed 1. Now, they should save dozens more.
Cuz I like a challenge
Why?