Capital Punishment Should be extinguished - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Capital Punishment Should be extinguished
in Politics

By ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 313 Pts
Reasons as to why capital punishment should be eliminated:

  1. It doesn't act as a good deterrent for serious crimes
  2. The Judicial system is based on inductive reasoning instead of deductive reasoning which means that although the premises might be very strong there still remains the possibility that the wrong conclusion has been formed. Now while inductive reasoning is a good thing which we should rely on in most cases it's not something we should rely on when deciding the fate of an individual where there is the possibility that that person could be innocent.  
  3. Once the person has passed away no one is getting penalized anymore. In fact, the only people that suffer here are the victims family and the supposed perpetrators family; the supposed perpetrator is at peace.
  4. There is no empirical and objective evidence of a supreme being that has given us given us the lawful authority to decide the fate of another human being.
  5. The death penalty does nothing to relieve the suffering of the victims and/or their families albeit it may just give the illusion of the burden of relief.
  6. Revenge is not justice.
Over to you. 
  1. Live Poll

    For or against Capital Punishment?

    3 votes
    1. For
      33.33%
    2. Against
      66.67%

The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.




Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 6
    @ZeusAres42

    Make capital punishment, a nationwide, and mandatory law, for murder, and see how fast, the various defense attorneys, and various anti capital punishment advocates, and activists groups file a lawsuit, pushing for a debate before the SCOTUS,
    themselves? 

    "It doesn't act as a good deterrent for serious crimes"

    From you as well:

    "The Judicial system is based on inductive reasoning instead of deductive reasoning which means that although the premises might be very strong there still remains the possibility that the wrong conclusion has been formed. Now while inductive reasoning is a good thing which we should rely on in most cases it's not something we should rely on when deciding the fate of an individual where there is the possibility that that person could be innocent."

    "Once the person has passed away no one is getting penalized anymore. In fact, the only people that suffer here are the victims family and the supposed perpetrators family; the supposed perpetrator is at peace."

    "There is no empirical and objective evidence of a supreme being that has given us given us the lawful authority to decide the fate of another human being."

    And maybe take the above questions, and present them to the SCOTUS as well, and let the entire country see how they feel about your individual philosophical opinions?

    The below philosophical point of view, sounds a bit like an anti capital punishment talking point?

    "The death penalty does nothing to relieve the suffering of the victims and/or their families albeit it may just give the illusion of the burden of relief."

    Were some of the families, of the victims, interviewed by any chance, to get their individual opinions, or feelings about this question, from you?

    "The death penalty does nothing to relieve the suffering of the victims and/or their families albeit it may just give the illusion of the burden of relief."

    Adding to this conversation, with a partial conversation from this topic forum:

    "Proposals on how to tackle the issue of gun related crime"

    There are 393 million plus guns, along with the illegal guns, that have been, slowly flooding the US, for years now

    Maybe a slow down, on nationwide gun production could be, a probable solution?

    Or maybe, a Death penalty, or a Capital Punishment solution, could be written and amended into the Second Amendment, to reflect the gun violence crimes, that some of the lawful gun owners, and the illegal gun owners, and the illegal gun dealer, who sells their illegal guns to the criminals, and the offenders, that have created some of the gun problems, that some have illegally affected their innocent victims, by victimizing their victims, and the victims, and the rest of the country with, for years now? 

    A third solution, could be a Reparations Solution?

    The family of the Shooter, could pay the victims family reparations, for the crimes, or crime, committed by the shooter? 

    Zombieguy1987Dylan
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @TKDB

    Really?!?! The family of the shooter should pay restitution. What if shooters start committing mass shootings because they hate their family and want them to suffer? That idea is not only bad, it has nothing to do with this debate.
    ZeusAres42PlaffelvohfenTKDB
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 6
    @piloteer

    Why not?

    "Really?!?! The family of the shooter should pay restitution."

    @piloteer

    Are you a pro gun individual?

    Because your below question, kind of resonates, like a probable, pro gun individual, question?

    "What if shooters start committing mass shootings because they hate their family and want them to suffer?"


    Zombieguy1987
  • Some people don't have the right to live. I think pedophiles should die by firing squad.
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @TKDB

    No, I am not pro gun. I'm pro logic though
    ZeusAres42Plaffelvohfen
  • @piloteer I think responsible people have the right to protect themselves how they see fit.
    piloteerDylan
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 6
    @piloteer

    "No, I am not pro gun. I'm pro logic though"

    And an individual, murdering another individual, isn't a pro logic ideal, is it?
    Zombieguy1987
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1714 Pts
    One of the best arguments against god's injustice in religion is the unfairness of the concept of infinite punishment for a finite sin. I believe that the same argument applies here.

    Everyone makes mistakes in this life. Some people make terrible mistakes multiple times. Executing them means that, first, they will never make up for their mistakes and never redeem themselves, taking away their chance to make things right. And second, taking away their life is the ultimate punishment, which would imply the existence of the ultimate crime - but there is no such thing, is there? One could say that the "ultimate crime" is killing off every single living being except for the individual, but in that case no one is left to judge the individual in any case, so the capital punishment would not be applicable even there.

    I would also point out that a society normalising legal execution is going to become desensitised to violence, which has profound implications on its culture (I do not think that the connection between much higher support for death sentence in the US than in the EU, and much higher crime rates in the US than in the EU, is random), but that argument comes from my personal experience and may be wrong on the societal scale. Perhaps desensitisation to violence actually leads to the reverse effect, and violence becomes less attractive when people do not see it as anything special.
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 6
    @MayCaesar

    Desensitized?

    We are already in a sense, living through a desensitized lifestyle as it is, in the United States already, aren't we?

    Kids, teenagers, parents, senior citizens all have been murdered in the U.S. because of some, and their sadistic gun violence brutality attitudes.

    And then the guns that they used to murder their victims with, in a sense, get defended by some of the pro gun crowd, by taking up a defensive position, from behind the language of the Second Amendment? 

    And then some will defend the criminals, and offenders, who are maybe on death row, and then take up their own defensive positions from behind their own anti capital punishment, or anti death penalty activist, or advocate philosophical talking points, and defend those very criminals, and offenders, with their anti death penalty, or capital punishment talking points? 

    While the families of the victims, defend their lost loved ones life, through the love, of their own caring, and loving words?

    Celebrating their lost loved ones life, that a criminal, or an offender, needlessly took.

    We live in the country that has more guns, than US citizens in it.

    We live in a country, where the mass shooter gun violence conversations are as common place, as toilet paper is, as common place as food stamps are, are as common place as the illegal alien, or illegal immigrant conversations are, or as common place as the Sanctuary City ideology is, or is as common place as the Steele Dossier product, and Mueller Report product, conversations are, right?

    "I would also point out that a society normalising legal execution is going to become desensitised to violence, which has profound implications on its culture (I do not think that the connection between much higher support for death sentence in the US than in the EU, and much higher crime rates in the US than in the EU, is random), but that argument comes from my personal experience and may be wrong on the societal scale. Perhaps desensitisation to violence actually leads to the reverse effect, and violence becomes less attractive when people do not see it as anything special."
    PlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987
  • I’m against on principles, but I also think there are some rare cases where it’s justified... I’m thinking about the Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy types, which should represent one case every 5-10 years I guess... Some people just want to see the world burn and there’s no point in keeping those alive in my opinion, it’s not even about punishement or revenge, some individuals are just too dangerous...  
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-offenses-other-murder

    "As it relates to crimes against individuals, though, the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim’s life was not taken.
         -Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008)"

     

    "INTRODUCTION

    The death penalty in the United States is used almost exclusively for the crime of murder. Although state and federal statutes contain various capital crimes other than those involving the death of the victim, only two people were on death row for a non-murder offense (Patrick Kennedy and Richard Davis in Louisiana) when the U.S. Supreme Court addressed this issue in 2008. No one has been executed for such a crime since the death penalty was re-instated in 1976. In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, held that the death penalty for the rape of an adult was "grossly disproportionate" and an "excessive punishment," and hence was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. The Court looked at the relatively few states that allowed the death penalty for rape and the few death sentences that had been handed down.

    Some states passed new laws allowing the death penalty for the rape of a child. In 2007, the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld the death sentence for Patrick Kennedy for the rape of his step-daughter, LOUISIANA v. KENNEDY (No. 05-KA-1981, May 22, 2007). Kennedy was convicted in 2003. However, Louisiana's law was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 25, 2008. See Kennedy v. Louisiana for more information. This decision also held that the death penalty would be disproportionate for any offense against an individual that did not involve death of the victim."



  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 6
    https://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/184605006--Video-2-Ga-cops-shot-suspect-killed-in-gun-battle/

    "Video: 2 Ga. cops shot, suspect killed in gun battle

    The suspect pulled a firearm and shot three times before fleeing."

    "SAVANNAH, Ga.  — Four officers were cleared by a grand jury after body camera footage from a fatal shooting of an armed felon was released, WSAV reported.

    Officers Michael Gonzales, Daniel Kang, Ruben Colon and John Hauber had stopped the suspect, 25-year-old Tyrie Cuyler, on Oct. 27 when he pulled a firearm during the traffic stop, according to SavannahNow.  

    Cuyler shot three times, striking Colon and Gonzalez. Officers returned fire, shooting 19 times at Cuyler as he tried to escape on foot. 

    Police found a .38 caliber Smith and Wesson revolver with electrical tape wrapped around the handle in Cuyler’s possession. They also found 16 individually wrapped bags of cocaine.

    “He’s (Cuyler) already demonstrated he’s dangerous, he’s already demonstrated he has no fear of shooting people, including the police, so you can’t let him go,” Major Gerry Long told the news site. They know that there’s an officer down so they can’t let this guy go out into the general public with a firearm, he’s obviously clearly going to hurt somebody.”

    The convicted felon was under investigation for two separate rapes at the time of his death."

    And some, want to see capital punishment extinguished?

    The above incident, is one of thousands, that occur, per hour, per day, per week, per month, and yearly, and as well offering, plenty of reasons enough, as to not having the death penalty, or capital punishment, being done away with, but could be used as a nationwide deterrent, for an individual to not try to commit a murder, or murders, in the first place?

    PlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987
  • John_C_87John_C_87 164 Pts
    @ZeusAres42 ;

    A state of the union address on Capital Punishment is made on the Union of number of Type Capital Punishment should be made ready for use. Not if Capital punishment can be directed to include lethal force.

    Example:

    The United State in basic Principle some murders can be performed after someone had gotten news of terminal illness. Victimizing someone may become an act of desperation. A second issue is some religions fear one type of lethal force over another.


  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 313 Pts

    With all due respect but would you mind saying that in layman terms, please? Thanks.
    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 313 Pts

    I've meaning to watch those cases on Netflix actually.

    I have to agree that in certain cases it just boils down to the elimination of threats that poses an imminent threat to life or a significant threat to life after incarceration. This, of course, has nothing to do with punishment, revenge, etc but simply the elimination of threats which I think is if not completely then largely objective.
    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @TKDB

    So instead of a mass murderer being able to destroy the lives of the victims, you think they should also be able to destroy the lives of their families as well? How many mass shooters actually care about their families? I'm guessing pretty close to none of them do. If someone wanted to exact revenge on their family and make them pay and suffer for their actions, your policy would make that possible. It wouldn't deter anybody. 
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    edited May 8
    I have to admit, I'm really undecided on this issue. I do know that the number of people who've been put to death but later were found to be innocent is very concerning, but I also know there were some terrible people who were put to death because their crimes were unspeakably heinous and they were not innocent. It seems cruel to put the responsibility on society to have to house and feed these terrible people. Maybe someone here can make an argument that solidifies my stance. I doubt it though. This is a very difficult topic.

    https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000983
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    @piloteer

    Then the US has a gun problem, and maybe, the Second Amendment, needs to reflect that problem? 
    Zombieguy1987
  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 313 Pts

    The Gun debate and this debate are completely exclusive to one another. If you want to debate gun issues then create another gun debate or post on one already created. 
    piloteer

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @ZeusAres42 I wish I could like....double agree with that ish. We need a double agree icon!!!
    ZeusAres42
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @TKDB

    If we have a "gun problem", perhaps you could try using good ideas to help the problem instead of what you've been doing. Obviously you're not afraid of embarrassment, so why don't you go ahead and demonstrate how your plan will be a deterrent for gun violence. Also, maybe you could address the topic of the death penalty while you're here, it's kinda what this discussion is really supposed to be about.
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    edited May 9
    @ZeusAres42

    You started the debate.

    @piloteer ;


    And as long as babies, kids, parents, and senior citizens are getting innocently murdered, because neither the lawful gun owner, or the illegal gun owner, are apparently, displaying an attitude problem, with their own self respect, and respect for the public in general, so why can't the Second Amendment, and the death penalty be talked about in the same conversation?

    When those gun owners, are the ones playing with the Second Amendment, the gun laws themselves, and the laws making murder illegal in the United States? 

    The victims of those thousands of committed murders, don't deserve to have their voices heard, by being mentioned, or through, having the Second Amendment, rewritten to reflect the abuses of the Second Amendment itself, by amending the Second Amendment, with a section representing the crimes of murder, and mass murder, as well? 

    By granting those same murderers with Capital Punishment, because, they lacked any Responsibility, or Accountability, for killing some of their own families, or for killing, the thousands of innocent lives, who were the family members, of other families? 

    Blood is being spilled every day in the United States, (and if the lack of the Capital Punishment penalty, might be why some individuals, are brazen enough to kill) other innocent people, who aren't of their own blood, and are just as brazen enough to murder their own blood, and then take their own lives, it would seem like the words, (Accountability, and Responsibility,) are getting shot through their own meaningful hearts as well, wouldn't it? 

    "The Gun debate and this debate are completely exclusive to one another. If you want to debate gun issues then create another gun debate or post on one already created."

    Zombieguy1987
  • TKDBTKDB 207 Pts
    @ZeusAres42

    And why not take your below positions,

    And get an attorney, and try to see if the SCOTUS, might take up your positions, in their very presence, and have your arguments, heard through the Nationwide news media outlets? 

    1. "The Judicial system is based on inductive reasoning instead of deductive reasoning which means that although the premises might be very strong there still remains the possibility that the wrong conclusion has been formed. Now while inductive reasoning is a good thing which we should rely on in most cases it's not something we should rely on when deciding the fate of an individual where there is the possibility that that person could be innocent."
    2. "Once the person has passed away no one is getting penalized anymore. In fact, the only people that suffer here are the victims family and the supposed perpetrators family; the supposed perpetrator is at peace."
    3. "There is no empirical and objective evidence of a supreme being that has given us given us the lawful authority to decide the fate of another human being."
    And see if they might agree with your positions? 
    ZeusAres42Zombieguy1987
  • John_C_87John_C_87 164 Pts

    With all due respect but would you mind saying that in layman terms, please? Thanks.

    ‘I can try.

    Layman term – We need different kinds of Capital Punishment to choose form, we do not need to end Capital Punishment.

    How's that?
  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 313 Pts

    Layman term – We need different kinds of Capital Punishment to choose form, we do not need to end Capital Punishment.

    And why do we need different kinds to chose from instead of it ending?



    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • John_C_87John_C_87 164 Pts
    @ZeusAres42 ;

    To insure the reliability of the meaning of capital punishment in the application of its United State.



  • John_C_87John_C_87 164 Pts

    . What the Constitutional goal in basic principle accomplishes is to prevent some-one form choosing their death by using the capital punishment system.

    . Sets the idea of menu on risk of conviction which operates in a scale with greater areas of relationship to the nature of a crime as cause to conviction.


Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch