Opening:
Greetings everyone, I’d like to start off by thanking my opponent for accepting this debate as well as any noble voters who'll sit down and read all of this.
This debate will be about the death penalty and the BoP is shared with both of us having to prove our case, just for clarification here is the BoP for both of us.
Pro: Has to prove the death penalty is immoral and inefficient at reducing crime.
Con: Has to prove the death penalty is moral and efficient at reducing crime.
For clarification, voters MUST keep in mind that in a scenario where Pro perhaps proves the death penalty is immoral, however, Con proves it’s efficient at reducing crime, due to both BoP’s NOT being fulfilled this will result in a tie.
Both opponents
MUST both fulfill their BoP
The way the debate will be structured will be as follows,
R1: Opening argument
NO REBUTTALS
R2: Rebuttals
R3: 2nd Rebuttals
R4: Conclusion
NO REBUTTALS
By Con accepting the debate he agrees to all of the rules and if broken will cost him a conduct point and vice versa.
Now that I’ve clarified the rules and BoP set out in the description, I’ll now begin my opening argument.
Table of contents for Round 1
Crime Deterrence: The Death Penalty is inefficient at deterring Crime.
Crime Deterrence: The Death Penalty is more expensive than life in prison which in turn takes away money from more useful programs and services.
Morality Argument: The Death Penalty causes more harm than good towards the victim's families.
Morality Argument: The Death Penalty leads to botched executions and innocents wrongly killed
Closing
Crime Deterrence: The Death Penalty is inefficient at deterring Crime.
The death penalty in practice has shown time and time again it’s overall inefficient at properly reducing crime.
Across various different studies and statistics, I’ve looked at, the common consensus among the crime analyst community is that the Death Penalty almost offers NO correlation with reducing crime.
Statistically according to
DeathPenaltyInfo.Org, it proclaims,
“ A Death Penalty Information Center analysis of U.S. murder data from 1987 through 2015 has found no evidence that the death penalty deters murder or protects police. Instead, the evidence shows that murder rates, including murders of police officers, are consistently higher in death-penalty states than in states that have abolished the death penalty”
An easy counter to this would be that correlation doesn’t equal causation which is a valid argument as crime rates could be affected by other outside factors and not the death penalty. However one of the analysists has this to say.
“Murder rates may be affected by many things, but the death penalty doesn’t appear to be one of them.”
“ While the death penalty, he says, “makes no measurable contribution” to police safety,”
While this is just one simple study, it does at the very least demonstrate that statistically according to various analysists the death penalty doesn’t make a measurable contribution to police safety nor towards public safety which is something to keep in mind.
However, this wasn’t enough for me and I wanted something more definitive which is than when I found an article by
amnestyusa.org which provides the opinions of a larger group of crime analysts and researchers opinions on the matter.
It finds that,
“ Most experts do not believe that the death penalty or the carrying out of executions serve as deterrents to murder, nor do they believe that existing empirical research supports the deterrence theory. In fact, the authors report that 88.2% of respondents do not think that the death penalty deters murder”
This according to the study is a level of an overwhelming amount of analysts believing in something as comparable as how 90 % of scientists believe in Global Warming.
Not to mention another study this time by
aclu.org which states that,
“ When police chiefs were asked to rank the factors that, in their judgment, reduce the rate of violent crime, they mentioned curbing drug use and putting more officers on the street, longer sentences and gun control. They ranked the death penalty as the least effective.”
We’ve now established that the death penalty has no measurable impact on deterring crime and that the majority of experts, researchers, and Police Chiefs believe the death penalty has no bearing on the reduction of crime and there are other more efficient ways at deterring crime.
Crime Deterrence: The Death Penalty is more expensive than life in prison which in turn takes away money from more useful programs and services.
A common myth concerning the death penalty is that it’s cheaper than life in prison.
However statistical data paints a different picture.
According to
aclu.org, Capital punishment wastes precious resources that could be better spent elsewhere as the study states,
“ It squanders the time and energy of courts, prosecuting attorneys, defense counsel, juries, and courtroom and law enforcement personnel. It unduly burdens the criminal justice system, and it is thus counterproductive as an instrument for society's control of violent crime.”
The study then goes on to state,
“ Limited funds that could be used to prevent and solve crime (and provide education and jobs) are spent on capital punishment.”
While we’re on the subject of money, according to
deathpenaltyinfo.org, the death penalty costs significantly cost more amount of money than life in prison would. To provide some perspective of the overwhelming cost, here is a quick rundown.
“Legal costs: Almost all people who face the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. The state must assign public defenders or court-appointed lawyers to represent them (the accepted practice is to assign two lawyers), and pay for the costs of the prosecution as well.
Pre-trial costs: Capital cases are far more complicated than non-capital cases and take longer to go to trial. Experts will probably be needed on forensic evidence, mental health, and the background and life history of the defendant. County taxpayers pick up the costs of added security and longer pre-trial detention.
Jury selection: Because of the need to question jurors thoroughly on their views about the death penalty, jury selection in capital cases is much more time consuming and expensive.
Trial: Death-penalty trials can last more than four times longer than non-capital trials, requiring juror and attorney compensation, in addition to court personnel and other related costs.
Incarceration: Most death rows involve solitary confinement in a special facility. These require more security and other accommodations as the prisoners are kept for 23 hours a day in their cells.
Appeals: To minimize mistakes, every prisoner is entitled to a series of appeals. The costs are borne at taxpayers’ expense. These appeals are essential because some inmates have come within hours of execution before evidence was uncovered proving their innocence”
We’ve now established that the death penalty according to various statistics, analysts and police chiefs is inefficient at the reduction of crime and overall costs more than other alternatives IE life in prison and takes away resources from other areas.
To provide clarification, here is a detailed
website that lists underfunded federal programs that in turn hinder criminal investigations. All of which would do a better job at deterring crime and would maximize effectiveness more than the death penalty would.
Essentially a few noteworthy underfunded agencies include but not limited too, The National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Both of which aid in stopping shootings and various terror attacks across the United States.
Morality Argument: The Death Penalty causes more harm than good towards the victim's families
A thorough study conducted by details how much pain and suffering the families of the victims undergo
oadp.org, details just the amount of trauma victims families undergo when the murderer is faced with execution.
“ Families of murder victims undergo severe trauma and loss which no one should minimize. However, executions
do not help these people heal nor do they end their pain; the
extended process prior to executions prolongs the agony of the family. Families of murder victims would benefit far more if the funds now being used for the costly process of executions were diverted to counseling and other assistance.”
However, victims families not only go through more pain when the murderer is faced with execution but they also feel very unsatisfied as according to
PBS in a 2012 study on the matter.
“ The 2012 study concluded families in Minnesota were able to move on sooner; because their loved ones’ killers were sentenced to life without parole, rather than the death penalty, they weren’t retraumatized in the multiple appeals that often precede an execution.”
Not only this but according to
psychology today, the death penalty not only causes pain for the victim's families but also for jurors/
“ The Capital Jury Project interviewed 1,198 jurors from 353 capital trials in 14 states and found that 81% of female jurors and 18% of male jurors regretted their decisions, and 63% of female jurors and 38% of male jurors sought counseling after the trial.”
Not only jurors but also correctional officers as it reads,
“ Corrections officers actually carry out the executions, and 31% of them suffer Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). In comparison, 20% of Iraq War veterans suffer PTSD.”
Conclusively it’s self-evident that the death penalty offers no closure towards the victim's families and causes much more suffering to not only the victim's families but also towards correctional officers and jurors.
Morality Argument: The Death Penalty leads to botched executions and innocents wrongly killed
Statistically according to
deathpenalty.org, around 3 % of death penalty executions are botched in some way, and other methods such as lethal injection have a 7 % botched rate.
While this number isn't that high, these executions are barbaric and inhumane to the person being executed.
Here are just a few examples of botched execution stories,
“ August 10, 1982. Virginia. Frank J. Coppola. Electrocution. Although no media representatives witnessed the execution and no details were ever released by the Virginia Department of Corrections, an attorney who was present later stated that it took two 55-second jolts of electricity to kill Coppola. The second jolt produced the odor and sizzling sound of burning flesh, and Coppola’s head and leg caught on fire. Smoke filled the death chamber from floor to ceiling with a smoky haze.”
Essentially imagine this,
Disclaimer: The following video I’ll be linking is rather grueling and on my first viewing of the movie terrified me for a good few days. Viewer discretion is advised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV4nJ3edl0A
This then happened again in this story,
“ 2. April 22, 1983. Alabama. John Evans. Electrocution. After the first jolt of electricity, sparks and flames erupted from the electrode attached to Evans’s leg. The electrode burst from the strap holding it in place and caught on fire. Smoke and sparks also came out from under the hood in the vicinity of Evans’s left temple. Two physicians entered the chamber and found a heartbeat. The electrode was reattached to his leg, and another jolt of electricity was applied. This resulted in more smoke and burning flesh. Again the doctors found a heartbeat. Ignoring the pleas of Evans’s lawyer, a third jolt of electricity was applied. The execution took 14 minutes and left Evans’s body charred and smoldering.[2]”
Both of these botched executions are rather inhumane and quite frankly barbaric. And the fact this happens to 3 % of the time raises an eyebrow that perhaps the risk of death this painful isn’t worth the risk.
Nextly the death penalty executes a rather decent amount of innocents as according to the
PNAS, nearly 1 in 25 death row inmates are innocent.
In which it states,
“ We conclude that [4.1 %] is a conservative estimate of the proportion of false conviction among death sentences in the United States.”
We’ve now established that overall a decent portion of death row inmates are innocent and an almost decent number of executions are botched which causes brutal deaths and unjust deaths.
Conclusion:
So far we’ve established that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime effectively, more expensive than life in prison, causes suffering for a large number of people including the victim's families and jurors, and overall leads to innocents executed.
I will now await my opponents opening, and thanks for any voters who’ve made it this far!
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments ✗ ✗ ✔ 3 points
Better sources ✗ ✗ ✔ 2 points
Better spelling and grammar ✗ ✗ ✔ 1 point
Better conduct ✗ ✗ ✔ 1 point
Reason: really solid openers so the forfeit is regrettable. Pts. to CON for PRO's forfeit. As pinkfreud08 used to say, "That's bad conduct!"
Hehe. Very cheap, and botched less often than lethal injection. :)
One of my favorite quotes: "just reuse an old rope and hang'em, no cost!"
Botched executions are a myth...if you adopt the firing squad ;)
yeah, long story short I procrastinated.
Thanks for submitting, I got worried it would "forfeit" you
its really hard to say that states without the death penalty have significantly lower homicide rates, but it complicated, gun laws poverty rates democgraphics even weather play a role but its funny that states that ban the death penalty actually have lover homicide rates