The death penalty
Lets say someone says that the death penalty killed over 3000 people but only 3 of them were innocent and they provide examples and evidence, and say that it toke away the lives of people who commited crime so it should be favored. How can i backfire this? Should i say that life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent and talk about how the eye for an eye mentality sends the wrong message and legitimizes violence therefore increasing crime? What else can i add
I. don't have a source handy, but I'm sure you can find several that will contend that people who commit murder are not thinking at all about punishment. Murder is a crime of passion, spur of the moment, usually. A robber is threatened by the store clerk and fires in fear. A wife is livid with her husband and grabs the gun. Unless it's a gangland-type hit, it is a spur of the moment crime in MOST cases. Does punishment deter murderers?
The "eye for an eye" argument comes from the Old Testament of the Bible. It is countered by passages in the New Testament, especially The Book of Matthew, if you want to get into that kind of argument.
And you can certainly argue that even one innocent person executed is just as bad as the murder of an innocent victim by a criminal.
By the way, you are not "backfiring," you are making a counter-argument or posing a rebuttal. An internal combustion engine can backfire.
Oh, I must say that your arguments stated in your question are valid, but make sure you can back them up with some research or philosophical references, etc.
Also -- there's a lot of evidence that the death penalty costs much more than a life sentence.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2011/09/22/death-and-taxes-the-real-cost-of-the-death-penalty/
Very true, Ms. Sue. The cost to the state for all the appeals that are allowed under law is enormous. The counterargument is that appeals should not be allowed, even if the original verdict was wrong.
Thank you so much :)))
To counter the argument in favor of the death penalty, you can highlight several points:
1. Focus on the potential for wrongful convictions: While the argument states that only 3 innocent people were killed by the death penalty, it is crucial to acknowledge that even one innocent life lost is one too many. The risk of executing an innocent person is high, as the legal process is not infallible. Many cases have been overturned due to new evidence, DNA testing, or advancements in forensic science, leading to the release of wrongfully convicted individuals. The issue lies in the irreversible nature of the death penalty, leaving no chance for exoneration.
2. Discuss the ineffectiveness as a deterrent: Contrary to popular belief, studies have shown that the death penalty is not a more effective deterrent than life imprisonment. The majority of crimes are driven by impulsive decisions, mental health issues, or socioeconomic factors, rather than rational considerations of punishment. Therefore, the severity of punishment does not significantly impact deterrence. Focusing on prevention through social and educational interventions, as well as addressing underlying causes, can be more effective in reducing crime rates.
3. Address underlying societal implications: Capital punishment perpetuates an "eye for an eye" mentality, which, in turn, normalizes violence and revenge as a means of justice. This approach does not convey a message of empathy, understanding, or rehabilitation. Rather than promoting a culture of healing and progress, the death penalty implies that violence is an acceptable solution, thereby potentially contributing to a continuous cycle of revenge and retribution.
4. Highlight financial and moral costs: The death penalty system is incredibly expensive, as it requires a lengthy legal process, specialized professionals, and heightened security measures. These costs could be allocated towards education, healthcare, or other social programs that can foster a safer and more equal society. Additionally, many argue that the state-sanctioned taking of a life contradicts the inherent value and sanctity of human life that society often seeks to uphold.
5. Discuss international trends and global perspectives: Present the fact that a significant number of countries worldwide have abolished the death penalty or have placed a moratorium on its use. The global trend demonstrates a shift towards recognizing the fallibility and human rights concerns associated with capital punishment. Engaging in an international dialogue on this topic allows for a broader perspective and the consideration of alternative systems of justice.
Remember to back up your counterarguments with data, studies, and examples to enhance your position. The goal is to engage in a thoughtful and informed discussion that presents a holistic view of the issue.