what is a good opening statement , argument, and rebuttal for a debate on capital punishment?

Question

i am in favor of capital punishment

Answer 1

I was pro-capital punishment for a long time, but I have changed my stance over the years, for several reasons:

1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. Look at all the people who have been released after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of the extra expense of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty states. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government becomes the bad parent who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst of our criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.”

5. The U.S. government is supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Answer 2

You don't have to condone brutal crimes or want the criminals who commit them avoid a harsh punishment to ask whether the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and whether it risks killing innocent people.

What about the risk of executing innocent people?
124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence.

Doesn't DNA keep new cases like these from happening?
DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

Doesn't the death penalty prevent others from committing murder?
No reputable study shows the death penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in states that do not.

So, what are the alternatives?
Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure and swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.

But isn't the death penalty cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process. When the death penalty is a possible sentence, extra costs mount up even before trial, continuing through the uniquely complicated trial (actually 2 separate trials, one to decide guilt and the second to decide the punishment) in death penalty cases, and appeals.

What about the very worst crimes?
The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??

Doesn't the death penalty help families of murder victims?
Not necessarily. Murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

So, why don't we speed up the process?
Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.

Answer 3

Opening statement for the rebuttal side could be: We do not benefit from taking the life of another.

1. Possible Alternatives to death
2. Possible high cost of execution
3. Mentally pain it has on the those involved in the process ( look up Californian Medical Professionals controversy over death penalty)

Answer 4

My position in support of capital punishment is totally unsupportable. I will be quiet now so that my opposition can make all the logical points in favor of abolishing capital punishment.

Answer 5

Why don't you just ask Someone 'please write my paper for me'

Open with an alarming statement that is true like 'Texas puts to death more people alone then any other state or country in the world' back that up with another attention getter like it is estimated of the ??? citizens put to death by Texas ???% are Innocent of their crimes.

That gets peoples attention and the stats are amazing.
You are on your own from here.

Conclusion 'summary' in the voice of the guy from south park 'The death sentence is baaad'

For me I believe that the death penalty is ok but I don't think our government is responsible enough to do it. They can't do anything else correct why give them the ability to kill american citizens. because of this i am against it.

The cost of putting someone to death is 10x the cost to keep them contained for life. In addition money really shouldn't be the basis for killing people.

Answer 6

Very difficult because of prosecutable and police mis-conduct. I am only in favor when all evidence is triple investigated, no eye-witness testimony when suspect is stranger unless supported.
For: if a bear kills a child, should we try to rehabilitate? Victim life ended, why murder lives.
'Eye-for-eye,' biblical means, punishment can not exceed crime, but only match it.

Answer 7

You already have your opening statement. The argument I would talk about knowing these criminals will never be able to hurt anyone ever again. The rebuttal talk about the money it is costing taxpayers every year to keep these violent criminals alive waiting on death row.

Answer 8

An eye for an eye? Should the punishment fit the crime?

Answer 9

Society has the right to guard itself from those who might want to destroy its guidelines.Society has the right to ascertain what punishment it deems applicable to extra healthful the crime. This incorporates the shortcoming of existence penalty. the persons have the right to inflict the shortcoming of existence penalty on someone to blame of against the law. non secular beliefs might want to no longer enter into this talk yet commonly does impression the placement someone takes in protecting or helping their position. someone quilty of against the law consisting of lst degree homicide in no longer entitled to assume society to help him with food, clothing, safeguard and clinical look after something of his existence. neither is society obligated to finish that if it chooses no longer to.

Answer 10

Does capital punishment work? Just ask any of the people who have been put to death due to the death penalty. Your answer, HELL YES!!!!!!!