Report this Argument Pro Thank you as well for the chance to debate. I am going to start by replying to some things my opponent has stated. For example, I cited before that on average it costs California around 10 times more to simply kill a criminal when compared to incarcerating them for life. As a nation that is 14 trillion dollars in debt and rapidly growing we cannot afford to waste this much funds on simply killing a criminal.
The death penalty provides for retribution against perpetrators and makes sure that they pay for their actions. Without the death penalty, it's otherwise difficult to make murderers pay sufficiently for their crime, as no punishment other than death really equates to that of the crime of killing.
A society that doesn't deliver justice is a society which will collapse. Criminals need to be held accountable for their actions. While no one enjoys the thought of having to kill someone, it can also be argued that the murderer bought the punishment on him or herself when he or she took the life of another.
The Death Penalty is Necessary to Deter Other Criminals One of the best arguments for the death penalty is that capital punishment is a huge deterrent we have to prevent others from committing heinous crimes.
The best way to deal with crime obviously is to stop it from happening in the first place. In turn, the best way to do that is to deter criminals from committing crimes. When it comes to murder, torture and other heinous crimes, the best deterrent we have is the death penalty. Criminals should be aware that that if they commit a serious crime, then their punishment will be equally as serious.
No one wants to die -- this is why using the death penalty as a deterrent is an effective way of stopping crimes An argument in favor of abolishing death penalty happening in the first place.
It's also in the criminal's best interests. Because, ultimately, not turning into a criminal in the first place should be in anyone's best interests. It can be seen as a disservice to those in the criminal justice system if our punishments aren't severe enough when we haven't effectively deterred criminals from entering the system.
The Death Penalty is Necessary to Protect Society Some criminals simply cannot be allowed to keep living because every moment they're alive is another minute that they're a threat to the community. These criminals must be killed because keeping them alive puts their fellow prisoners, their guards, and the wider community at risk.
Some criminals are simply so far gone that they're beyond help and will always be a major risk to society. For these criminals who essentially have no hope for redemption anymore, the only remaining option is to remove them from existence.
Violent criminals pose risks that are just too great for them to be allowed to live. Many run the risk of being at risk by these criminals, including but not limited to: Fellow prisoners are the people who are most at risk.
One of the reasons prisons are so dangerous is because they are full of murderers and rapists -- it would be unjust to the other inmates to expose them to such violent offenders. Guards are at risk, as well.
Prison officers are often assaulted and even killed by offenders who should have received the death penalty.
The wider community is also at risk from violent offenders who either escape prison or are paroled early due to an ineffective parole system. The safest solution, therefore, is to kill violent offenders before they can be a threat once again.
The Death Penalty is Necessary for Families of Victims to Move On Properly The death penalty is necessary because many victims' families will never be able to feel safe or live a normal life again if they know that the person who killed their family members is still alive.
Even if the criminal is placed in the most secure facility possible, fear still grips the families of the victims. While this fear may be irrational, that doesn't make it any less real.
We must consider the rights of these families to live normal lives when sentencing murderers; we should prioritize their rights over those of the violent criminal.
We also mustn't let a violent offender continue to harm others from the inside, even if they're not intentionally doing so. This applies especially to criminals who have made threats against other people in society and family members of other victims. The Death Penalty is Cheaper Than a Lifetime Prison Term One of the more controversial arguments for the death penalty is that the cost of keeping someone incarcerated for the duration of their natural life is huge.
Unlike prison sentences, the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable. The arbitrary application of the death penalty can never be ruled out The death penalty is often used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups. Majority opinion is typically in favor of the death penalty, with recent surveys indicating around a 50 – 55% level of support. Opponents believe that it is wrong for the state to kill, per se. These are a crucial questions for the deterrence argument. A recent survey of a number of death row prisoners in several states showed that few of. The death penalty is applied at random. The death penalty is a lethal lottery: of the 15, to 17, homicides committed every year in the United States, approximately people are sentenced to death, less than 1%. Capital punishment goes against almost every religion.
This is a cost that society shouldn't have to pay. Violent criminals and murderers shouldn't be taking away tax dollars from things like education and health care.
The argument here is that we simply can't afford to keep these people alive nor do we have any responsibility to do so. It can be said that they brought their punishment on themselves when they committed their crime and they're the ones who should have to pay for their crimes, not us.
Which of the above arguments for the death penalty is the strongest Justice.Unlike prison sentences, the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable. The arbitrary application of the death penalty can never be ruled out The death penalty is often used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups.
Unlike prison sentences, the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable. The arbitrary application of the death penalty can never be ruled out The death penalty is often used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups.
Reasons for Abolishing the Death Penalty by Nanette FlemingThere are many things that I don't agree with in today's society, but out of all the wrong doings that take place, I believe the death penalty is the worst of them all.
I am strongly against th /5(3). Majority opinion is typically in favor of the death penalty, with recent surveys indicating around a 50 – 55% level of support. Opponents believe that it is wrong for the state to kill, per se. These are a crucial questions for the deterrence argument.
A recent survey of a number of death row prisoners in several states showed that few of. Sep 15, · The Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty.
Updated on March 20, Paul Goodman. more. article lists all the key pros and cons of executing people who have committed serious criminal offenses— first the arguments in favor, followed by the arguments against.
in states where the death penalty has been abolished, there has been no Reviews: A Valid Argument For Abolishing The Death Penalty Words | 9 Pages. Lindsey Hogan Professor Reynolds English July 22, Determinism: A Valid Argument for Abolishing the Death Penalty?
In , Lawrence Bittaker, an infamous serial killer from the ’s, was born to two unloving parents in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.