Debate Help!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lorena Cami
  • Start date Start date
L

Lorena Cami

Guest
I have to do a debate in Lit. My topic is: All persons, no matter age or situation, should be sentenced to capital punishment... And my partner and I have to debate against it.. Anyone have any good statistics or stories to support our opinion? Help would be muchly appreciated.

Thanks.
 
if the person is too young to understand what they have done wrong
why should they be sent to jail

like off the simposons when maggie shoots mr burns she didnt get sent to prison because she was a baby
 
make sure to use these arguments in support if capital punishment:

-it serves due justice (the punishment fits the crime), and serving due justice is the NO.1 job of a court of law (preventing crime is NOT their job)
-it shows that we are tough on crime
-it gets bang for the taxpayers buck
-criminals given the DP have a 0% recidivism rate
-It holds people responcible for the horrible content of their character. This fulfills what MLKJ always wanted: judge not by the color of your skin, but by the content of your character. The characterof these criminals warrants death
-It holds the criminal responcible for his actions
-appeals and **** aside, it's cheaper then prison
-it decreases the prison population, which saves even more taxpayers money
-Because the death penalty is the punishment given by a neutrel judge, there is no vengance in it. Therefore, there is no moral objection to be had with the death penalty.
-The death penalty defends human rights by establishing a mentality that "we will not tolerate any violation of any innocent person's human right's
 
The best place to start is at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1917
which is specifically designed for students and debaters on capital punishment. It has links to both sides and is very easy to use. Be sure to click on curriculum. In the meantime, here are a few facts about the death penalty, with sources below:

Nationally, 127 people on death rows released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.

We have a good alternative, life without parole, on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?

The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members have testified that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. Speed up the process and we will execute innocent people.
 
Reasons against Capital Punishment (Death Penalty)
Capital Punishment is a barbarian act and remains as a blot on the face of humanity since long time. There are numerous reasons against death penalty which strongly advocate the abolishment of brutal capital punishment.

"I do not believe any civilized society should be at the service of death. I don't think it's human to become an agent of the Angel of Death." Elie Wiesel once said that. Indeed, while claiming ourselves integral part of the new civilized society aren’t we doing injustice to our very claim by propagating the theory of execution?

Heated debate is going on and there are people advocating the capital punishment and there are many against it. "We oppose the death penalty not just for what it does to those guilty of heinous crimes, but for what it does to all of us, it offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life." -- Most Rev. Joseph A. Fiorenza, President, National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1999. Well, there are numerous reasons against Capital Punishment. Before discussing those reasons in detail, let us have a look at the history and the types of capital punishment.

History
According to the legal codes of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) the death penalty was inflicted on the culprits indulged in practice of a different religion, pre-marital sex, homosexual behavior, engaging in prostitution, rebellion by teenagers, and blasphemy. Afterwards it also served as the means by which rulers could suppress their rivals.

There are 7 types of capital punishments known to world. They are Hanging, by Firing Squad, Electrical Chair, Poisonous gas, Lethal injections, Stoning and Guillotine. All these types are of more or less inhumane nature. The questions arises here – when there are other means of worst punishments available today in this modern society, why we still persist with such inhumane punishments?

Reasons Against
There are plenty convincing reasons against the use of capital Punishment.

1. Denial of basic right - According to Humans Right Association capital punishment overrules our most basic human right - the right to life. Human life has fundamental value. The blessedness of human life is denied by the death penalty. Live is precious.

2. The possibility of error – Later investigations revealed many convicted individuals innocent which got death penalty in the past, and have been pardoned. Recent DNA investigation studies have shown the same thing.

3. Unfair Judgment - Generally, it is observed that Capital punishment is inflicted unduly on the poor and minorities. If you follow the data of these victims, you will find that the mentally ill, poor and people belonging to minorities form a large chunk of the total number. You can also notice a kind of racial discrimination this happens due to varied reasons. Because the poor can offer very low compensation the defense lawyers are often incompetent, resulting in losing the case. Due to prejudice and bias, poor people, and people from minority sections become soft target for such capital punishments, as unrestricted discretion has offered to District attorney. If any one wants to appeal then it becomes a burdensome process for him often resulting in denial of justice.

4. Lack of Deterrence - The purpose of any punishment should be deterrence from repeating the same act. But, according to the statistics available, the death penalty has not been effective in controlling the homicide rate. The studies have revealed the shocking truth that executions actually increase the murder rate. That means the capital punishment does not deter violent crime. According to a New York Times study, the last 20 years witnessed 48% homicide rate in states with the implementation of capital punishment compared to 23% in the states without capital punishment.

5. The prolonged uncertainty – The validity to the deterrence argument is annulled by the delays, endless appeals, retrials, and technicalities that keep persons predestined to capital punishment waiting for execution for years. In fact, we are not competent enough to carry out execution. This uncertainty and incompetence offers another great injustice. It is itself cruel and a form of torture.

6. Justifying circumstances - Sometimes, persons suffering from emotional trauma, abandonment, violence, neglect or destructive social environment commit such heinous crimes. These mitigating situations can have devastating effect on their humanity. So, it is unfair to hold them fully responsible for their crimes. It is our communal responsibility to show some sympathy to some extent.

7. By giving capital punishment, the family of the victim is permanently traumatized and victimized. They are often punished by their loved ones without their fault, even though they are innocent.

8. Effects on society – Capital Punishment is itself a premeditated murder. This is unacceptable even it is inflicted by state authority as it lowers the value of life. In fact, such act can only brutalize the society. "Revenge is essential" can become a society attitude. By witnessing such acts, our own mental makeup starts believing that violence is necessary to curb the wrongdoings.

In conclusion, capital punishment is a moral dishonor. The mockery is that the very civilizations that have no right to impose it, are in particular leading the traditions of capital punishments.

The economic malfunctions and cultural diseases in those very societies contribute to the violence. So, instead of inflicting Capital punishment, it’s our duty to provide opportunities for all people to accomplish a good life in a rational culture.

As Most Rev. David B. Thompson, Bishop of Charleston, S.C. said, "Capital punishment feeds the cycle of violence in society by pandering to a lust for revenge. It brutalizes us, and deadens our sensitivities to the precious nature of every single human life."

============

Against Capital Punishment
A Summary of Arguments Presented at a Meeting of the Men's International Theosophical League of Humanity, March 31, 1914

[Included in To Abolish Capital Punishment: A Plea to the Citizens of every Country, Point Loma, California, 1914.]

Capital punishment is a barbarous survival from a less enlightened and refined age; it is incongruous and incompatible with our present standard of civilization and humanity. It has been abolished by many states and countries, and we must look forward to the day when the other governments will follow suit.

The arguments against capital punishment are many and cogent, but the pleas advanced in its favor are few and specious.

Punishment is supposed to be for the protection of society, and for the reformation of the wrongdoer. It purports to protect society by preventing the same criminals from repeating their crimes, and by acting as a deterrent to other prospective criminals. Capital punishment is a notorious failure in these respects. It does indeed remove the particular culprit from the possibility of repeating his crime; but this is of very small account in view of the fact that murder is seldom a career of repeated acts, but consists of single acts perpetrated by different individuals. The man whom we remove from the scene, therefore, is not the man who, if suffered to live, would have been likely to endanger our safety.

As a deterrent to other murderers, likewise, the death penalty has proved a signal failure, as may be seen by comparing the criminal statistics of those countries where the punishment is in force with those of countries where it has been abolished. Nor is the reason of this failure far to seek. Murders are nearly always committed in sudden fits of passion or temporary insanity, when no consideration of reason or self-interest can appeal to the doer. Further, such uncertainty attends the consummation of the death sentence -- due to the natural hesitation and inclination to mercy of judge and jury, to the chances of reprieve and commutation -- that this penalty is far less deterrent than are those penalties which, though less severe, are also more certain. Finally, we have not answered the question whether there are not other and more effective deterrents; and, there are such deterrents, in comparison with which capital punishment is seen to be clumsy and ineffectual in the extreme.

As to the reformative character of punishment, it is scarcely necessary to point out that capital punishment effectually removes all possibility of this by cutting short the life of the wrongdoer and thus taking away both his chance of reform and our opportunity of discharging the duty of reforming him.

Capital punishment is irrevocable, and the errors of justice cannot be rectified. All possibility of reconsideration is taken away. Innocent persons have been hanged, and judge, jury, and the whole legal machinery involved have thereby been made privy to the very crime they sought to punish. In view of the very uncertain and unequal character of our merely human endeavors to mete out justice, no proceedings of ours should be of this irrevocable character. So complex and uncertain is the process of sifting whereby finally a few individuals are sorted out from the mass and consigned to punishment, that the selection seems largely arbitrary, and we find that the actual convicts are no worse, and some perhaps even better, than many whom the hand of the law never reaches. What principle of equity or reason can justify us in singling out for our harshest treatment, by so haphazard a method, a few individuals who for the most part manifest no particular reasons why they, and they alone, should be so treated?

Capital punishment sins most by depriving the culprit of his chances of reformation. As a weaker brother, who has fallen through causes that are inherent in our social structure, and fo
 
You're negating this, right?

It's too absolute. Now, mind you, I'm all for absolutes. But this assumes that the same absolute is always relevant/irrelevant. Circumstance, age, etc, for example are absolutes. Whether or not they are relevant is not absolute.
Consider....
Killing in self-defense. That would be part of the "situations" that are being ignored. Many argue that such can be justified. But if you're removing situation from consideration, then defense just became murder. Unless the opponent advocates that situation only be ignored when determining punishment, which would be a double-standard.

Or consider the soldier who gives away vital information. Under this argument, it doesn't matter if he sold the enemy the information for a couple thousand dollars, for a dime, or if they tore it out of him after he fights to hold out for three weeks of relentless torture, and he's finally cracked, not just information-wise, but in the mind, completely snapped. Doesn't matter. Either way, he's punished by death, not death (or imprisonment, or whatever) for the traitor, but care and rehab for the torture victim who managed to hold out a really long time.

And is that the actual wording of what you're supposed to negate? 'cause what it says is that EVERYONE dies. Not just those who've been convicted of a crime. Everyone, no matter what, gets sentenced to capital punishment. Including the people doing the sentencing. If that's the actual wording, it's just mass suicide.

If that's not the actual/full wording, then I that point's probably way off. But check what the wording of the resolution is. If that's it... either the opponent isn't going to be upholding the actual resolution, but something vaguely similar to it, or else the opponent is advocating the extermination of humankind.

Good luck!
 
1. well if the person is a baby or just a little kid than clearly they have no idea what they have done.

There was a case where a little kidergardener shot a kid who he was argueing against because he was mad at her and didn't know what he was doing.
anyways it's from: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/mar2000/flin-m01.shtml

2. sentencing people to capital punishment for stealing that they were forced to do is wrong because they were being held hostage.
 
Webcams.com-Get your account for free

Hi girls and boys,
I want to share some interesting thing with you!

During last week I was surfing the Internet just as every day. I checked my facebook profile, bought some songs on iTunes, chated with friends, googled here and there.... and suddenly the thread on some freebie forum caught my attention. I read it completely, and tried the method described in it. It worked!

Webcams.com-free-lifetime-account
 
Back
Top