See How It Works!
US2 - Abolish Death Penalty
| Congress should abolish the death penalty. | |
|
|
|
   
|
|
Description
The death penalty is unconstitutional, but the current Supreme Court won't do anything about it, so Congress should pass a law making it illegal for the federal government and states to impose the death penalty.
Arguments
Congress should seriously study the costs, deterrent effect and biases inherent in imposition of the death penalty. After such a study, it will become clear that the death penalty is senseless and unjust.
It costs far more to execute a person than to keep him/her in prison for life.
"The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate."
- Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008)
The death penalty is immoral and contradictory. Moral systems uphold the sanctity of life, and taking the life is immoral. As Jesus said: let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
Telling people that killing is wrong and then killing people is contradictory.
Their knowledge of their crime & punishment is the best revenge. No death necessary.
The death penalty cannot be used because society is imperfect and will sometimes put to death innocent people. Applying an irrevocable penalty to someone who didn't deserve it is unacceptable.
The death penalty is racist. It is applied far more to minorities than to caucasians.
I don't believe the death penalty is a deterrent, despite studies that might suggest otherwise. Most people who commit murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. Also, states without the death penalty consistently have lower murder rates than states with the death penalty.
I'm sure a review of the few studies saying that the death penalty is a deterrent would reveal significant flaws and inconsistencies in those studies.
Counterarguments
The appropriate response of society to terrorism carried out around the world or within our borders is to apply the death penalty. The death penalty is also appropriate in the following cases:
- Assassination of a law enforcement officer, judge, juror or prosecutor for the purpose of obstructing an ongoing criminal proceeding
- Prolonged torture or multiple murders
- Defendant has already been convicted of first-degree murder or who is serving a life sentence without parole
July 14, 2005, Testimony to the Massachusetts House of Representatives
A series of academic analyses in recent years have suggested that between three and 18 lives would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-2911428.html
Sounds like a surprisingly strong deterrence effect. If it's accurate, it's a pretty strong argument for the death penalty.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-2911428.html
Sounds like a surprisingly strong deterrence effect. If it's accurate, it's a pretty strong argument for the death penalty.
What about folks who are truly hateful and vow to kill if ever released? Additionally, what about killers who endanger the life of fellow inmates? Surely, some people need to be removed from society permanently.
- This won't fly well because there are certain crimes and this whole issue is more than just politics, it's philosophy.
9 Topics
Discussion
started
by cesium62
on Nov 7
badly formed argument
started
by cesium62
on Nov 7
No study needed
started
by thunderjt
on Oct 24
death penalty
started
by saritap
on May 29
Life imprisonment is enough, plus a counter-proposal
Life imprisonment is enough to protect society. I'm not sure about the numbers, but I'd be surprised if people who commit capital murder are more likely to endanger fellow inmates -- remember, only certain murders are eligible for capital punishment, and the people who commit those murders are not necessarily more violent, since they include things like murder during the commission of a felony, and even an accomplice to a felony who did not pull the trigger can get the death penalty.
I would be more open to something like capital punishment only for people who commit murder in prison. I think that might actually have a deterrent effect, it only kills people who have shown that life imprisonment is not enough to protect society, and I assume there would be more certainty about who was guilty, because of close monitoring by prison guards.
Related Ideas
| Capital punishment only for people who commit murder in prison. More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weak Counterargument