• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Death Penalty in Theory

Do you support the Death Penalty


  • Total voters
    78
:spin: :alert
The death penalty itself does not cost more. It cost's more because of the ridiculous restrictions and appeals, etc... We need judicial reform, and put in an express lane. That would definitely cost less than LWOP.

An express lane would be immoral, but sure we could do that.
 
:spin: :alert
The death penalty itself does not cost more. It cost's more because of the ridiculous restrictions and appeals, etc... We need judicial reform, and put in an express lane. That would definitely cost less than LWOP.

It's not spin, it's required checks and balances of a system. That's the cost of the using the death penalty, it's part and parcel. Making it more efficient isn't a good idea either considering it's a flawed system. Hell Illinois had to put a moratorium on its death penalty for quite some time since it found too many people in death row being exonerated for the crimes they were convicted of. Speeding that process up isn't going to solve that problem, it will exacerbate it. Then think of all the money you have to pay out to families of people put to death for crimes they didn't commit.

Bottom line, 10's of millions more per inmate for CP vs LWOP.
 
No, but I also don't agree with LWOP. You murder someone, you get killed. Problem solved.

And in a system of perfect knowledge that could work out; but we don't live in such a world sadly enough. There's no real benefit of the death penalty to society or our system.
 
And how exactly is that immoral? Do explain.

Aside from the fact that the execution its self is immoral? Well, we should do everything we can to rule out the possibility of putting an innocent man to death, if the death penalty is going to be allowed. It's immoral to risk the lives of the innocent for our own bloodlust.
 
And how exactly is that immoral? Do explain.

You'll be killing innocent people, and that comes with the system itself. Expediting the procedure will only make that worse, not better. This is one of the largest uses of government force we can possibly undertake and because of that, the checks and balances must be extreme.
 
You are telling me that it costs LESS to house someone for life than to use the death penalty? I'd love to know how those numbers work out.....

Unfortunately, a lot of the time it does, simply because we allow people to file endless appeals, at taxpayer expense, to keep putting off the execution. More often than not, these appeals are perfunctory, they are filed just because the convicted criminal doesn't want to die, not because there's any actual evidence of innocence. There are millions upon millions of dollars wasted because we have no controls.
 
Oh I understand that, what I am saying is that if we widely used the death penalty for these crimes, people would probably be less inclined to commit them in the first place.

We widely use imprisonment and that doesn't stop anyone, even the people who have already been there. Recidivism is quite high for convicted felons so prison clearly doesn't deter anyone, yet we still use it.
 
I didn't mean sin in a religious sense-

You do know the difference between punishment and prevention?

When you lock someone up they cannot commit a crime, if you want to punish them, you want them to suffer for their crimes, the difference is in intent, one is to prevent further crime, the other is to make sure someone "pays" for their crime.

THe death penalty is purely the latter.

deads cant suffer
 
When you lock someone up they cannot commit a crime, if you want to punish them, you want them to suffer for their crimes, the difference is in intent, one is to prevent further crime, the other is to make sure someone "pays" for their crime.

Seriously? You think there's no crime in prisons? You think there's no violence in prisons? You think there are no murders in prisons?
 
Seriously? You think there's no crime in prisons? You think there's no violence in prisons? You think there are no murders in prisons?

Of course there is, though I don't see how the next logical step is "kill them all".
 
Many of the cases I've read about had to do with law enforcement perjury. Its hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt when you consider that some of these people have an incentive to lie in order to get a conviction.

This. This times a BILLION.
 
Of course there is, though I don't see how the next logical step is "kill them all".

Nobody said kill them all. Please quote where anyone said that.
 
There is 0 evidence that a death penalty deters more people than life in prison.

You are hopping back and forth between a topic and a sub-topic. The belief that you can attack an institution with relative impunity (as it was put, "it's honor") does indeed encourage follow on attacks. The death penalty as it is currently structured is not an effective deterrent because deterrents to crime must be swift, sure, and public; and our death penalty is none of these things.
 
There is 0 evidence that a death penalty deters more people than life in prison.

There is zero evidence that prison deters anyone, why not just get rid of prisons? The fact remains, these are PUNISHMENTS, not DETERRENTS. How many times do we have to keep repeating that before you stop flogging your straw man?
 
What happened to "Blessed are the poor"? It's their kingdom, after all.

Why not quote the entire line?

Matthew 5:3 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

I don't imagine you can explain to me what that has to do with anything he said.
 
Unfortunately, a lot of the time it does, simply because we allow people to file endless appeals, at taxpayer expense, to keep putting off the execution. More often than not, these appeals are perfunctory, they are filed just because the convicted criminal doesn't want to die, not because there's any actual evidence of innocence. There are millions upon millions of dollars wasted because we have no controls.

Right, so it's not really the death penalty that is so expensive.
 
Back
Top Bottom