Posted on 04/12/2005 6:15:32 PM PDT by el_doctor2
I have a debate soon, ive been assigned the Con side, are there any anti-death penalty supporters on FR...i know there must be a few. And if you arent , do you know the talking points for that side?
I'm not anti-death penalty, but I know one of the talking points is that you can NEVER really know if a suspect is guilty unless you have a film or videotape of the actual crime. Even confessions have turned out to be false.
This is exactly why I couldn't do debate. I couldn't drop my beliefs and argue something that is 180 degrees out of phase with who I am. That being said, o0ne of the arguments the pro-let the murderers live side uses is that it is ultimately more costly to put someone to death than to just have life sentences. Don't know the veracity of that claim, though.
I think your best bet is to focus on the idea that due to diminished culpability (because of youth), retribution does not provide sufficient justification of the DP. As an example: we don't allow juveniles to make the momentous (and admirable) decision to enlist in the Armed Forces without parental permission. Thus, the U.S. Congress has made a policy decision that juveniles do not have the mental capacity to make such important decisions. The same can be argued about murder: do juveniles (in general) have sufficient mental capacity to form the requisite intent to commit murder? If the answer is no, then retribution (the primary goal of punishment) is less important because the juvenile could not form the level of intent that we as a society seek to punish.
I support the death penalty, but I can throw you a few of their arguments
1. It's cruel.
2. Europeans don't like it, and as their history over the last century shows them to be far more civilized than us, we should follow their lead.
3. Non-whites, or possibly the killers of whites as opposed to the killers of non-whites, are more likely to get fried. They're usually a little confused in this area.
4. The inevitable fact is that someday, if we haven't already done it recently, we will execute an innocent person. Therefore we shouldn't execute anyone.
5. It's cruel, and Europeans don't like it.
I won't comment on the logical content of most of these arguments. It's just too easy.
People often say that, but it's incredibly educational to argue the other side. You'll understand the side you support even better.
Ted Bundy hasn't killed any 12-year olds recently.
The above is probably the weakest of all the pro-death penalty arguments. The type of people typically being executed are the sort who rarely think more than 5 minutes ahead. It's really unlikely there's any sort of rational balancing of the punishments vs. the rewards of whatever murder they're committing.
I'm all for the fiscal, man.
The anti-death penalty side can simply be in favor of life sentences without parole which also prevents further murders; to which the counter-argument is the microscopic chance of escape (of which Bundy is an example, but it wasn't from an actual Max security prison).
I say that as a firm opponent of the death penalty, by the way, an activist against it, in fact. But the only argument I consider valid is the "reverence for life womb to tomb" argument advanced by Christian thinkers like the late pope. That is not an argument with much appeal in the secular world.
Go to
prisontalk.com
visit the Capital Punishment forum
There's really enormous amounts of very solid evidence that a substantial number of convicted criminals have been fully and completely innocent.
How the hell did you get roped into the con side?
You forgot the most important point: if we execute murdering sons-a-B*&^%es for murders they commit before turning 18, the French might be inclined to think less of us than they already do.
Ditto Italian Communists and British Labour Party members.
And we wouldn't want that.
A better counter-argument, IMO, is that once the death penalty is abolished, the left will turn its sights on life without parole sentences as being "cruel and unusual," and then of course they will push for giving these people parole. I'd say it's much more likely a "life without parole" felon would be paroled than he'd be likely to escape.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.