In debate class im arguing that the death peanlty should be removed, i need some ideas on why it should, and what do u think the other side might say of why it shouldnt be removed.
2006-12-11 12:06:12 · 9 answers · asked by JP 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The death penalty is like religion.. it constantly looms over man/woman, reminding said person that there are consequences to pay for your actions.
I think its a good thing having the death penalty. seeing as how i don't ever plan to break rules that would be that harsh I'm not so worried about it
2006-12-11 12:12:57 · answer #1 · answered by JaReD k 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that as is stands right now, the death penalty is completely ineffective. The wait is too long, and the methodology is flawed. For the death penalty to be effective; it actually needs to serve as a deterent! Now, you have a better chance of dying of old age as being executed (unless you're convicted in TX, then you're SOL). An alternative to the death penalty would be to actually make prison more effective. This will never happen in this society which coddles criminals, but i think that if you are convicted of violating someone elses rights; yours are gone! You should have to earn them back. The whole death penalty issue is a stickler because we have some real sick-o's in the US and what do you do with them if the death penalty is removed? But, I'm sorry I digress. To your question: the biggest reason is above: it's not effective in preventing crime which is why it was instituted! Conversly; in order to elimate the death penalty -- societal changes must come into place in the US. In Europe where there is no death penalty; very few individuals even own guns. Try suggesting that in the US; you'd be taken out back and shot...I know I'm rambling, and I'm sorry. Hope this helps at least a little.
2006-12-11 20:17:53 · answer #2 · answered by limeyfan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm all for the death penalty. Why should a tax payer pay to support a murderer for the rest of their life? The prison system is already over populated and tax payers have to spend more all the time for building new prisons. These types of criminals don't deserve to live and burden society the way they do. They should not ever be let out of prison and we shouldn't have to pay to keep them either. The person they killed doesn't get to enjoy life, why should the murderer?
2006-12-11 20:19:24 · answer #3 · answered by brioma33 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Removed- Major argument: If it is not OK to kill people, why should the government, of all people, be the ones who are doing the killing.
Shouldn't- Major argument: If you took someone's life, why do you deserve to live a full life if the victim never got a chance too.
2006-12-11 20:10:31 · answer #4 · answered by henryinalgona 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pros:
-prevents recidivism (repeat offenders)
-reduces the numbers of inmates who burden the system financially
-reduces crowding
-reduces pre-meditated crime (a large percent of crime is premeditated rather than "crime of Passion"
-
Cons:
- doesn't prevent crimes of passion
-people who commit crimes are not deterred by stiffer penalties - They believe they will not get caught
-savings in penal systems offset by additional appeals court costs
-recidivism is better prevented by re-education and training of the offender rather than by harsher penalties.
It is best to stay away from moral or ethical aspects of the debate - unless this is for a class in ethics. You will do better in debate by sticking to fact that are quantifiable.
Interestingly enough, this was the same topic we debated back in the early eighties. I was switch - side.
Good luck!
2006-12-11 20:17:02 · answer #5 · answered by yardchicken2 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think we should have the death penalty. A 2 time sex offender - poof - be gone with thou. Anyone who takes the life of a child - poof - gone. I have no tolerance for sexual predators, child molesters, or murderers. I don't see why my tax dollars should clean their teeth, feed them, educate them, and keep them sheltered. Call Me cruel - I don't care.
2006-12-11 20:09:54 · answer #6 · answered by MommaSchmitt 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Obviously if you can't think of ANY IDEAS why it should be removed...THEN MAYBE IT SHOULDN'T!
The other side might say, you can let the guilty live at YOUR HOUSE while they are serving time for their horrid crimes.
2006-12-11 23:03:04 · answer #7 · answered by SecretFriend 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"yardchicken2" said it all for me, you go girl. But I do have to add, that once you are sentenced to death, they should take yo to the next room and administer the sentence. Save on taxpayers money, the victims family can put it behind them.
2006-12-11 20:23:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should not be removed. Anyone who goes through it will never be able to hurt anyone ever again.
2006-12-11 20:10:31 · answer #9 · answered by runner1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋