Tassadar v Xaos : Capital Punishment.

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Oct, 2 2003 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Tassadar v Xaos.What more can I say? Two great and intelligent posters.This contest is a mouth watering prospect.

Each debator will have one opening statement each.This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each.There will be one closing statement each and no rebutal.
No post will be longer than 800 words and in the case of the closing statement no longer than 500 words.In the event of a debator posting more than the stated word limit then the excess words will be deleted by me from the bottom.Credits or references at the bottom count as part of the post.

Editing is Strictly forbidden.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements only 1 image or link may be included in any post.Opening and Closing statement must not carry either images or links.

The Debate topic is : Capital punishment,That murderers convicted by a jury should be executed.

Tassadar will argue for this proposition and he will open the Debate.
Xaos will respond and argue against this proposition.

As a guide responses should be made within 18 hours.However if the debate is moving forward then I have a relaxed attitude to this.

Defaulters will not be excepted in the next Tournament.The winner will receive 3000 ATS points the loser(on condition of completion)will receive 1500 ATS points.This on top of generous points allocation for Debate forum posts.

This Topic will be opened on Sunday Evening GMT and the debate may start.

I wish you both goodluck

The winner of the bout will face the winner of the OIMD v Stumpy contest.




posted on Oct, 5 2003 @ 02:39 PM
link   
*First off, I would like to wish good luck and a great debate to xaos, good luck!* (737 words)


The death penalty is a necessary action that has a positive effect on society today. It is an effective deterent of crime as well as a safeguard forsociety. It also helps to keep order in our cities. Furthermore, I feel it is a just and effective punishment for those who have commited crimes cruel enough to deserve death. The death penalty is not a new idea in our world. Its origins date back over 3,700 years to the Babylonian civilization, where it was prescribed for a variety of crimes. It was also greatly used in the Greek and Roman empires. It continued into England during the Middle Ages, and then to the American colonies where it exists still today. In the American colonies, death was a prescribed punishment for crimes such as: murder, rape, arson, and perjury. In the world today, the main crime deserving death is obviously murder.

The death penalty truly does deter crimes and murder. This is a simple answer to a problem at the heart of a heated political controversy over the punishment. Opposers to the death penalty say no because of the large amount of people on death row today. They also say that states that have the death penalty have a higher crime rate than those that do not, and therefore it is not effective and somewhat contributes to the problem. I must point out though that states that have the death penalty are usually highly urbanized areas that most likely will have high crime rates because of the large population. Rather, in rural states there is no need for the death penalty because the population is most likely low and scattered throughout the region. States that practice capital punishment do so because of high crime rates, not vice versa. Abolitionists also state that the death penalty is a racist punishment, and only given to African Americans. In the May 11, 1998 issue of JET magazine it stated that over 50% of all blacks favor the death penalty. According to a U.S. Dept. Of Justice press release on December 13, 1998, Of those executed were all males: 45 whites, 27 blacks, 1 Asian, and 1 American Indian. Five were hispanics...At the end of last year, 34 states and the federal prison system held 3,335 men and women (44 females) on death row: 1876 whites, 1406 blacks, 28 American Indians, 17 Asians, and 8 of other races. There were 283 Hispanic prisoners... Also a 1985 University of North Carolina study by economist Stephen K. Layson states that, every execution of a murderer deters, on average, 18 murders. This further verifies that without the death penalty our murder rate would be immense. For example in Utah on June 10, 1988 Arthur Gary Bishop was executed for sodomizing and then killing a group of young boys. In the first half of the year (January-June) there were 26 murders in Utah. In the second half (July-December) there were only 21 murders, an almost 20% drop in the murder rate.

Capital punishment is truly a safeguard to society because, It is the finality of the death penalty which instils fear into the heart of every murderer, and it is this fear of punishment which protects society. An example of this is England practiced capital punishment throughout the early 20th century, and had a lower crime rate than that of any large US city. Since England has abolished the death penalty in 1968, their murder rate has risen over 100%, and 75 English citizens have been murdered by released killers. This proves not only is it a safeguard but it also helps deter crime because in the hundreds of years before England had one of the lowest murder rates in the world. The death penalty is the most effective means of crime detterent as you can see. It not only punishes those who commit the crimes, but also prevents future crimes by scaring the would-be murderer with the consequence he would pay for his actions. It has proven effective throughout history, and will hold strong through the ages as long as people continue to be corrupt and commit crimes in this world.



posted on Oct, 6 2003 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Capital punishment is the act of state-sponsored murder, a practice outlawed in almost every civilized nation. It is a disgrace that in a country as free as the United States that this barbaric practice is allowed to continue. The Death penalty is an out-dated act, and America is behind the curve in its abolition, after the entire modern world leaves it behind we clutch it in conservative self-righteousness, just like slavery. Major supporters are rapidly fleeing from it, as DNA testing reveals its fallacy again and again. At one time the death penalty was a common place occurrence, with its necessitude never questioned, just as slavery or incest or a variety of other acts regarded as abominations in modern society. But, just as these other practices have been turned away from by civilized countries, so has the death penalty been rejected, by over one hundred and twelve nations in total. Yet the USA is not on this list, instead sharing a list with other human rights violators such as Iran, Iraq or China. America continues to insist on participation in this horrific act, though it is steadily losing support in America, as former capital punishment supporters flee from the cause.

One of the main arguments for the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrent to people seeking to commit murder. In fact it does nothing of the sort, a study done my noted criminologist Thorsten Sellin showed that the murder rates in states with the death penalty are the same as states without such an evil practice. The United Nations conducted a study in 1998 that concluded that "This research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole still gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis." In the past twenty years, use of the death penalty has increased by over six hundred percent while the murder rate remained the same. How did this rapid increase in executions help the situation? It didn’t.

In fact, who are these murderers that the death penalty is meant to deter? Think about who is likely to commit murder… People who are in the depths of rage, totally consumed by their anger, unable to think of anything but killing their antagonizer. Really, who is going to think “raaghhh, I really want to kill this guy, he ruined my life, he insulted me deeply and I am taken over by hate, but wait a second, if I kill him, I could go to prison.” Someone in that state cares not about his punishment, only of assuaging their pain. Who else will commit murder? Cold blooded pre-mediators, folks who have thought about it and have decided that the killing is worth the punishment. The insane too are killers, people so far gone that they care not about the consequences. My case in point is the Unabomber, a man who worried not over the punishment he received when caught, he just cared about causing disorder. In fact, Kaczynski wanted to be killed when caught, he preferred it to life in prison, how did the death penalty prevent this case?

People who use the deterrence argument rely on the idea that death is more of a harsh penalty than life in prison without parole. In fact the opposite is true, what is a worse consequence, an easy quick death, freeing them from the torture of life, or the opposite: life in a maximum security prison, with no hope of escape, the only companionship is that of your seven foot, four hundred pound “boyfriend” from the communal shower. The food is horrible, the cell is tiny, there are no diversions and no chance of ever being free again. What would you choose? Hmmm?
Along with all these other excellent reasons, one of the main problems with the death penalty is the fact that it is so inaccurate as far as its victims go. In the past twenty years, 112 people have been released from death row. They were all innocent. In the past century it has been found that over four hundred innocent people were mistakenly put on death row, twenty three were executed. Something this inaccurate should not be such a cherished American institution, and many people are coming to realize this. Governor Ryan of Illinois, a longstanding republican has denounced the death penalty and abolished in his state. How can we keep going on with these executions when so many people are being falsely punished. The answer is that we cannot.

XAOS



posted on Oct, 6 2003 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The negative has made clear his wishes to attack the death penalty, and, as so many before him, has failed to present any evidence or strong contentions against capital punishment. To outline the errors presented in his case, and prove to the judges the effective employment of the death penalty, I shall review..

The death penaly does not deter future criminal incidents? Death penalty opponents love to assume that the principal purpose for capital punishment is deterrence, possibly realizing it is a perfect straw argument. Tangible proof of deterrence alone is not a valid reason for capital punishment (or any other form of punishment, for that matter), nor is it the main rationale employed by astute death penalty advocates. As Christian writer C.S. Lewis observes, "[deterrence] in itself, would be a very wicked thing to do. On the classical theory of punishment it was of course justified on the ground that the man deserved it. Why, in Heaven’s name, am I to be sacrificed to the good of society in this way? -- unless, of course, I deserve it." Inflicting a penalty merely to deter -- rather than to punish for deeds done -- is the very definition of cruelty. A purely deterrent penalty is one where a man is punished -- not for something that he did -- but for something someone else might do. Lewis explained the logical end of this argument: "If deterrence is all that matters, the execution of an innocent man, provided the public think him guilty, would be fully justified." Men should be punished for their own crimes and not merely to deter others. That said, the death penalty undoubtedly does deter in some cases. For starters, those executed will no longer be around to commit any more crimes.

Innocence? There are no innocent murderers... The major media reported this highly publicized Columbia University study uncritically when it was first released in 2000. But Reg Brown from the Florida governor’s office exploded it: "The ‘study’ defines ‘error’ to include any issue requiring further review by a lower court.... Using the authors’ misleading definition, the ‘study’ does, however, conclude that 64 Florida post-conviction cases were rife with ‘error’ -- even though none of these Florida cases was ultimately resolved by a ‘not guilty’ verdict, a pardon or a dismissal of murder charges." Brown noted that even political overturning of death penalty cases added to the figure. "[T]he nearly 40 death penalty convictions that were reversed by the California Supreme Court during the tenure of liberal activist Rose Bird are treated as ‘error cases’ when in fact ideological bias was arguably at work." Paul G. Cassell of the Wall Street Journal explained how the 68 percent figure is deceptive: "After reviewing 23 years of capital sentences, the study’s authors (like other researchers) were unable to find a single case in which an innocent person was executed. Thus, the most important error rate -- the rate of mistaken executions -- is zero." As to DNA testing, the sytem has been proven quite efficient. Since reinstituting the death penalty in 1976, not one person executed in the United States has been later proven innocent as a result of DNA evidence.
On another note, using the United Nations as a source? My dear friend, the United Nations is, in itself a joke. To rely on inefficeint sources is to rely on lies...

Again, allow me to recap. The death penalty has proven effective in the past. It is proving effective today. It will prove effective in the future. All murderers convicted by a jury in court should recieve capital punishment for their crimes against another.

(606 words)



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Capital punishment is road-kill on the highway of progress. Like other things, such as the horse drawn carriage or the dial-up internet connection, the death penalty has become obsolete in this day and age. It is America’s appendix, an established part of America, but quite useless and we could do quite well without it. Capital punishment is a vestigial attachment to the past, a relict of times when people cared less for the value of a human life, and were quick to discard the lives of those they deemed unworthy. Oh well, they would go to heaven anyway. In modern society, where the existence of God and His heaven is uncertain, and the worth of a human being is held up above all other things America still clings to the idea that a punishment deemed as cruel and unusual by almost every nation on Earth is humane. It is time for America to grow up and realize that killing in retribution is wrong. The laws of America do not follow the principle of ‘An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,’ yet it still lowers itself to the level of a murderer every year. That is what it does… Every time a convict is killed the USA is just bringing itself down to murderer status. Are we not better than them? Do you not pride yourself on the fact that you are not a murderer? Can America not raise itself up out of this filth and proclaim that murdering in revenge is wrong?

The death penalty is one of the most expensive, yet useless, rituals in American law. It can cost millions of dollars to the American taxpayer, money that could support a man in jail for life as well as have enough left over to increase security. Imagine how much money is spent every year to kill a person on death row, money that could be going to much better uses, such as benefiting the victim’s family, or providing extra protection against escape. Capital murder trials cost nine times more than other trials, trials where the defendant is given an infinite amount of time to appeal, rather than having to prove his innocence in one go. Why is this person executed? So that he will kill no more? He isn’t going to kill anyone if he spends his life behind bars, with no hope of parole or escape, so why the need to kill him? Is it some sort of primal urge? That can be the only explanation, as it is much more logical and reasonable to keep the man in a cell for the rest of his life. Some supporters of capital punishment declare that cost does not matter so long as the guilty man is killed, but this kind of statement only reveals a twisted sense of justice in which someone will go to any length to have a man executed. This is not a rational statement, killing someone is unnecessary for the purpose of keeping a murderer out of a population, so why spend extra money doing it?

And now to debunk my honorable opponent’s previously stated refutations.

1. He states that deterrence is not a major reason for Capital Punishment. Yet he devotes a major paragraph of his opening argument to stating that indeed, a major purpose of the death penalty is to keep other people from committing murders. Indeed, a majority of the pro-death penalty web sites I have visited seem to be supporting this idea. Yet now it is not a main reason? In fact, what is the purpose of the death penalty if not to make people think twice about killing? Eternal imprisonment for a murderer is good enough for keeping killers off the street, and there is no risk of murdering an innocent man. And that brings me to my next point.

2. Tassadar states that there are no innocent murderers. This assertion is completely true. By all means, someone who kills another human cannot be considered innocent. However, there are numerous accounts of people who had been on death row for sometimes decades, and were declared innocent, sometimes grimly close to execution. There is little debate over whether or not innocent people have been executed, and only the most conservative proponents of the death penalty will state that every person killed by the government was guilty. In some cases you cannot really tell, so apparently the government decides to err on the side of death rather than compassion. When a strictly conservative leader such as Gov. Ryan rejects the death penalty for fear of killing the innocent, you know that there must be something wrong with it.

Capital punishment has been effective in the past, then again, so was slave labor.

XAOS



posted on Oct, 7 2003 @ 09:19 PM
link   
I see my colleage and dear friend xaos has yet to realize how horribly shockingly a murderers nature truly is, so I'll go ahead and break it down for you...

Imagine yourself in a room, 12 feet long by 6 feet wide. You're sitting on a metal bed bolted to the floor with a thin foam cushion. The only other things in the room are a table and a chair, a sink and a toilet. There is no window, only a small faint light on the ceiling. You spend all of your time in this room, you have no choice. This is your dining room, your den, your bedroom and your bathroom. You are allowed to read and write letters in this room. You cannot entertain guests in this room, you must go somewhere else for that, in a room with a mesh screen for you to sit behind, where you are constantly watched over. Even though this is your bathroom, it has no shower stall or bathtub, but once a week you are allowed to leave this room to take a shower. Your days are spent inside this room reading, thinking and worrying. You aren't in any ordinary room, you're in a cell on death row. Death could be by firing squad, lethel injection, the gas chamber or electric chair. Chances are you've been in this room for many years and will be for many more. Once all the appeals have failed, it soon is time, and you will be moved to a holding cell. There you will be offered your final mean, of your choice. Your last visitors arrive, first your lawyer, your family members and at last a preist who prays with you. You take your final glance around the room, as you are lead to another room close by, the execution room. A few prison officials are present to witness your execution. In a matter of moments it's over.

You could have been Gary Gilmore, Ted Bundy or Charles Brooks, all famous serial killers. Maybe you were the first women to die by lethel injection, Marcie Barfield, or the first women to die by the electric chair, Martha Place. Whoever it was well deserved this punishment, in fact, some readily accepted it in comparison to spending the rest of their lives in a jail cell, but many people who did deserve the death penalty did not recieve it.

In August 1969, seven people died at the hands of a serial killer including eight month pregnant acress Sharon Tate. This was the result of a bloody rampage by Charles Manson.
Between 1976 & 1977 David Berkowitz terrorized New York City killing 6 woman and wounding 7 more. Berkowitz, A.K.A Son of Sam, a mail man, took the orders to kill from his dog Sam, and is now serving 25 years to life in jail.

Here's a kicker for everyone:
Between 1978 and 1991 Jeffrey Dahmer murdered and raped the dead bodies of 15 young men, cutting of their body parts and storing them in serveralplaces. When the police raided his house the found a human head in the fridge, 3 heads in the freezer, a human heart in the refridgerator freezer compartment, a blue barrel jammed with body parts and bones, 2 skulls in a computer packaging box, 3 skulls and some bones in a filing cobinet, 2 skulls in a kettle and a penis and some hands in another kettle.

These criminals and many others are sitting in a jail cell. These sick psychotic people who took the lives of others get the luxery of cable T.V. They are permitted 15 magazines, 25 books, 4 newspapers, 15 personal letters and a bible. They are allowed to participate in weightlifting, leather work and learning to use an IBM computer. They can also study to get a University degree, all using public tax money. They are allowed to smoke. God help us that a Sadomistic, Necro philliac should have to go through nicotine withdrwel. Many of these men, like Charles Manson, are eligible for parole after 20 years. What happened to an eye for an eye?

To state an eye for an eye is not required, you are saying some humans are valued more than others. To say, imply, hint, or even ponder upon such a notion is far beyond facist and supremacist, it's "racist". Yes, those who oppose capital punishment are in fact racist if they call "equality" outdated. The negative has made clear his understanding and love of American values.

Is equality not one of America's most common values?
Or has that all changed?

(790 words)



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 12:36 AM
link   
No reply from xaos.

Initially I was disheartened by this.

But if the first qualification round serves to show the ability of potential debators to write then this first round,which was not originally planned,shows the ability of potential debators to compete.

So it is with confidence in the integity of this tournament to find a worthy Challenger for our Champion that I pronounce Tassadar the winner of this contest.

Tassadar will go on to face either stumpy or OIMD in the next round.

I would appreciate a U2U from xaos so that I can determine his eligability for the next tournament.

Congratulations Tassadar.The next debate topics will be posted on Sunday.

Do not worry about the manner of your victory.This process is about seperating the wheat from the chaff to find the best debator to challenge out Champion.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join