Death Penalty Original Report
The Original Report From Negative Side
(Death Penalty Should not Exist) Good morning, honorable judge, my dear fellow debaters ,ladies and gentleman , we are now here debating whether death penalty should exist, and we think the negative answer should be chosen.
The reasons why we say so are determined by a lot of factors,which can be listed as follows:
First of all, Death Penalty sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.
Yes, we want to make sure there is accountability for crime and an effective deterrent in place; however, the death penalty has a message of \one of us, so we'll kill you\someone who committed a murder. Does that make sense?
Second, with the growth of knowledge, we can easily find that the death penalty can not be an effective deterrent for serious crimes. Stephen Nathanson, the author of “An Eye for an Eye”
said, “Mountain climbers risk their lives for thrill and adventure; cigarette smokers risk their lives for pleasure; speeding drivers risk their lives in order to get to their destinations a bit faster.” The same goes with criminals. If a criminal tends to kill somebody, He just lost his reason , Nothing can stop him ,even the death penalty.
Furthermore,financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is 2-5 times more than that of keeping someone in prison for life.
Judges, attorneys and court reporters all require a substantial investment by the taxpayers. Do we really have the resources to waste?
To conclude , today the abolition of the death penalty in our country, is the result of humanization, and a higher level of understanding of punishment. So, our country should abolish the death penalty.
free debating
问题一 Today's data shows that life imprisonment could achieve the same
effect as the death penalty and it’s more humanity .so,my dear fellow debaters ,i would be glad to hear your opinion .
that’s a good point.but i can’t entirely agree,
First, the use of life imprisonment will bring enormous pressure to our country’s financial costs. Countries have to use taxpayers’ money for basic necessities of prisoners. furthermore, China is a resource- poor country.
second,in fact,life imprisonment is more cruel than death penalty. You say the death penalty is inhumane, but being imprisoned for life lets the criminals live without hope, isn't it a kind of inhuman?In the view of personal point,death penalty is inhuman than life imprisonment ,but,in the view of country life imprisonment is inhuman ,don’t you think the country benefit is more important than personal benefit? thank you
问题二 The abolition of the death penalty is the pursuit of human civilization. would u like to prevent the development?
Thank you for your question! but
we don't think the abolition of the death penalty is the
development of human civilization.Those who make mistakes must pay the price, so that our society can be in
order .Why should a murderer deserve to breathe the air? Why should we pay our money to keep them that way? Do you agree that ? I ‘m sure you are agree me .
问题三Don’t you think death penalty will lead the criminal’s family in great trouble?
Well ,yes ,but
this fact can not be a reason for abolishing the death penalty, because the victims’ families bear greater pain.
And death penalty is the fair way to resolve their pain. And if a criminal isn’t sentenced to death, he still has a chance to kill while in prison, or even worse, escape and go on a crime spree. You see,the consequences of this is to bring more victims and more pain. The abolition of the death penalty on the criminals is a good choice.But it is a great hidden danger to society.
So this returns to the benefit between the collective and the individual, I think there is no need to repeat.
问题四:If you killed someone, do you want to have a second chance to repay community?
Of course, you said very reasonable, but
premise is the murderer wants to repay community .And it is impossible to guarantee the right of all the people, so we need death penalty to protect as many people as we can.The one who invade the rights of others to an extreme degree has no standpoint to ask for equal rights. After all,we can’t make experiment with the personal safety.
That’s all i want to say. thank you.
conclusion
Good morning, honorable judge, my dear fellow debaters ,ladies and gentleman , I'm honored to be here to make a small summary statement.
Before I go any further,please let me spell out once again what my position is.we insist that death penalty should not be applied . First of all,
we should have a clear understanding on killing.We as a society have to move away from the “eye for an eye”revenge mentality if civilization is to advance.
Death penalty sends the wrong message :why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.The death penalty is a violation of our human rights.
The right to live is a basic right of every human being , and no man has the right to decide when a life should be over ,even if it is our country. what is more,
the purpose of death penalty is to prevent people from breaking the laws; but in fact,the effects are not as good as we expect .
According to a investigation , in the nearly 20 years , the crime rate didn’t decreased but even increased .
According to Stephen Nathanson, the author of “An Eye for an Eye”, the fear of death does not usually stop people from doing what they want to do. “Mountain climbers risk their lives for thrill and adventure; cigarette smokers risk their lives for pleasure; speeding drivers risk their lives in order to get to their destinations a bit faster.” The same goes with criminals. If a criminal tends to kill somebody, He just lost his reason , Nothing can stop him ,even the death penalty.
Thirdly , The criminal is not the only one who has to face the punishment. The prisoner’s family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death at the same time.
However,it’s unjust for his/her family to get emotional punishment .
So ,from our analysis, we can say death penalty should not be applied.Thank you !
Original Report
The Original Report From Positive Side （Death Penalty Should Exist）
Good morning, honorable judge, my dear fellow debaters ,ladies and gentleman , we are now here debating whether death penalty should exist, and we think the positive answer should be chosen .
Firstly, death penalty can make justice better served. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, doesn't it make sense that the punishment for the perpetrator also be death?
furthermore, perhaps the biggest reason to keep the death penalty is to prevent the crime from happening again. The parole system nowadays is a joke. Even if a criminal is sentenced to life without
possibility of parole, he still has a chance to kill while in prison, or even worse, escape and go on a crime spree.
Last but not the least important,it contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system.
Each additional prisoner requires a portion of a cell, food, clothing and so on.
Prisons across the country face the problem of too many prisoners and not enough space & resources.When you eliminate the death penalty as an option, it means that prisoner must be housed for life. Thus, it only adds to the problem of an overcrowded prison system.
Taking all the factors above into account,we do believe and strongly support that Death Penalty Should Exist.Thank you!
free debating
1,We think death penalty ban the criminal from making mistakes again radically, what do u think about it?
that’s a good point.but i can’t entirely agree,
i think we should focus on education rather than punishment.For example，Chinese authorities still face threats from groups in
Xinjiang ,although we have killed many people.So,it’s clear that we can ban the criminal ,for only we educate them rather than kill them,
2,If we don’t adopt death penalty,but life sentence，don’t u think it’s a waste to us to spend our taxes to raise criminals？
i’m afraid you are wrong there.
In fact,carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison. How can this be? It has to do with the endless appeals, additional required procedures, and legal wrangling that drag the process out.