[WD #2] The Death Penalty

Rules

• 
  -There will be no flaming of any kind aloud. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and although you are aloud to disagree and argue ones points do not directly insult a member deliberately.
  -Post as high quality as you're able to. Please use proper grammar and spelling to insure that you are getting your point across correctly.
  -Do not steal arguments or posts from anywhere else. This is a debate. You are aloud to use outside sources but be sure to credit them properly.
  -Do not vote for someone as best debater just because you agree with them.

I will be including my final thoughts at the end of the week and will be including who I believe was the best debater. I may set up a poll as well and let the members choose who did the best. Once I have enough points I will be donating them to the best debater. I also hope to become an investor and/or use points to get this stickied for a week every week.

Best Debater - [TBA]

So here are a few questions to get us started.

Do you think the Death Penalty is effective?
Do you think the Death Penalty should be removed?
Do you think the way we execute should be changed if it should not be removed?



Good luck to all!

Last weeks winner was ๖ۣۜPђreคK
http://marketforums.org/Thread-WD-1-Legalization-of-Drugs

Most of the time the death penalties are fucking inhumane.
The lethal injection is very painful and slow.

Just put them in jail for life, two wrongs don't make a right.

Just to keep this going; the lethal injection is only done after the criminal is put to sleep. Since you voted we should keep it but change the method what do you think would bethe best way to execute a man?

Why does it even matter it happens maybe 3 times every year.

3 lives are "publicly" taken by the government. It matters to a lot of people.

Death doesn't solve anything. Be much better putting them into an solitary confinement for life. That fucks you up so much it's not even funny. They will die mentally which is the best part.

I'm not sure what to think, but for now I would say keep it. If it ain't broke don't change it. Although I'm sure some of you will say it's broken.

There shouldn't be much opposition against the death penalty IMHO.

If you have ever lived in a country which despise the thought of giving death penalty to a dangerous criminal you would be supportive of having the death penaly legalized. Norway gives shelter to Mullah Krekar, allowing him to tell his followers in every XXXistan country to kill armed forces from the West. He is not put in prison as he is classified as a national threat yet he receives funding from the Norwegian government and round'the'clock protection in case America would send people to assasinate him (and they tried it once).

Norway can't give him out either as no country would give him life in prison, they would rather put him on death row...

I don't see the argument against it personally. If you're torturing someone who effectively has done the same (to deserve death row) then you're as bad as them. Putting them on death row is the best public thing you can do. It's rather hard to get on death row, pretty much all of them who have been put on it would still do crime if they were millionaires. Fact is, they're sick. Why waste resources on someone who will never get released? Why pay people to cook food for this horrid human being who has killed loads of people for fun?

As you said paradox, it isn't an inhumane death as some people think.

Actually Crayo, there are a few flaws in that argument. In Illinois half the people on death row were proven to be innocent. That means that 12~ people that were sentenced to death were actually innocent. So how many innocent people have we killed? Another thing that you said, with wasting resources, is false again. It actually costs much more to kill a man than it does to keep him alive in jail for the rest of his life. All of the paperwork costs a lot more than the food that he would be given throughout his life.

I doubt it costs more to kill someone in a day, than it does to keep them for life in prison. Resources are low. And that Illnois argument is just a fault on that town/state, the general "death row" system is flawless. It would be illegal to put someone to death if they are innocent, and I'm pretty sure if you're on death row they have SOLID evidence. It's not like the old days, back then it was flawed, but in the modern days I can't see anything wrong with it.

"The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated."

http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

Of course it's not the most credible source on the internet but the same statistics can be found in many places.