GTP Mass Debating Contest- Heat 4

[Touring Mars]

I should note that I suggested that sort of thing for the first debate and was shot down by none other than you.

Ooops... that must have been the 'other' me...

 

[Danoff]

Team AAMMM Rebuttle​

Keeping such an offender behind bars only serves to damage society yet further – though they have been removed physically from society, they are not removed fiscally, and present a drain on public resources for the duration of their term.

As we have previously established, incarceration represents a very minor drain given the small number of executions. This is true even if there are no additional execution, legal, or incarceration costs – though many individuals wait for decades to be executed[1]. The meager financial gains of execution are further reduced by any wrongful-execution lawsuits against the state[2,3].

If the purpose of their punishment is to protect society and there’s no possibility of their reintegration, then surely a life sentence, rather than a death sentence, is the very antithesis of this aim.

The aim of life imprisonment is to protect society by keeping the prisoner behind bars (as evidenced by the fact that not all inmates serving life imprisonment face execution). The death penalty only serves to add the inevitability of killing innocents.

A potential for losing one’s life for the most heinous of crimes also acts as a deterrent. As with the earlier firearm debate, who would, knowing that if caught they can face certain death, commit the crime in the first place? The existence of such a punishment acts as a disincentive to almost anyone who would commit a crime where the punishment is apt.

Statistics refute this assertion[4,5]. Execution deters sensible people; however, sensible people do not commit horrible crimes. The people committing these crimes aren’t expecting to get caught, or aren’t acting in a rational, levelheaded manner. Fear only deters those who think with a level head. Moreover, the fear of wrongful-execution is something law abiding citizens must face under a system of execution.

Not executing someone because they might be innocent makes no more sense than not imprisoning someone for the same reason.

Life imprisonment allows for the possibility, indeed the inevitability, of new evidence exonerating wrongly-convicted individuals[6-8] as well as the rare case of true rehabilitation (see Reggie Kray, UK 2000). In an imperfect judicial system, life imprisonment will save innocent lives.

Word Count: 198


References
[1] – CNN (2005). Warden: Williams frustrated at end . Retrieved from Cnn.com on October 20, 2006. Web Site: http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/13/williams.execution/
[2] – Elias E. Lopez (2006). Dorothy Anderson McCarty, 84, sued Cuba for husband's death. Retrieved from MiamiHernald.com on October 20, 2006. Web Site:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/obituaries/15706686.htm
[3] – Associated Press (2006). Court won't rule on request to disqualify DA in case . Retrieved on October 20, 2006 from DallasNews.com. Web Site: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8JR15GO0.html
[4] – Ford Fessenden (2000). Deadly Statistics: A Survey Of Crime and Punishment . Retrieved October 17, 2006 from nytimes.com. Web site: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstr...ference/Times Topics/People/F/Fessenden, Ford
[5] –Raymond Bonner and Ford Fessenden (2000). States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates. Retrieved October 17, 2006 from janda.org. Web Site: http://janda.org/c10/statisticsnews/NoDeathPenalty.htm
[6] – Innocence Project (2006). Press Room. Retrieved October 17, 2006, from innocenceproject.org. Web site: http://www.innocenceproject.org/press/
[7] – Associated Press (2005). DNA Evidence Clears Georgia Inmate of Rape. Retrieved October 17, 2006 from FoxNews.com. Web site: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178138,00.html
[8] – Associated Press (2002). For 110 Inmates Freed by DNA Tests, True Freedom Remains Elusive. Retrieved October 17, 2006 from deathpenaltyinfo.org. Web site: http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=17&did=293

 

[Famine]

Apologies for the delay - I've had no internet access at home since 5.58pm last night (about 15 hours ago) due to, apparently, "line congestion" (wtf?).

Since I've technically missed the deadline, I'd be happy to concede. But I can submit a rebuttal anyway.

 

[Danny]

Okay, 1 day deadline extension if you can get it in by this time tomorrow.

 

[Dave A]

Sunday

Sorry, should have given notice.

Due Wednesday 1st November

Technically he's got another week anyway , t'would not be right to have anyone conceed under such circumstances .

 

[Danny]

Technically he's got another week anyway , t'would not be right to have anyone conceed under such circumstances .

That's the debater spirit!

Dave, I award you The Excellence Of Character award for this week!

 

[Famine]

My rebuttal will mainly consist of reasons why Orange Broadband should receive the death penalty.

 

[Danny]

I'd have given it to the Orange Phone "help" website and customer services for Pay as you Go.

 

[Dave A]

Add Dave "not to be confused with the other Dave Allen" Allen into there and you might be onto a winner .

That's the debater spirit!

Dave, I award you The Excellence Of Character award for this week!

Bless yer little cotton socks.

 

[Danoff]

I thought it was due this wednesday too, until Famine didn't post anything and I looked back and saw it was due on the 1st. Glad to hear we'll be getting it before then (if Orange Broadband gets their act together).

 

[Famine]

Rebuttal:

While it’s tempting to say that justice is served when the “punishment fits the crime”, one must remember that no justice system is infallible. Numerous convictions for murder, rape, and other violent crimes in the United States have been overturned due to subsequent introduction of DNA evidence into old cases.

Whilst we agree that there is no such thing as a perfect judiciary, surely this makes the exoneration no more sound than the original conviction?

The team bring up new detection techniques – such as DNA evidence. Such sophisticated methods for crime analysis lend more credence to present convictions (or acquittals) than past ones and we posit that execution should be held as an option in those extreme crimes where there is no doubt of the culprit (including DNA evidence where appropriate).

Some innocent individuals have been incarcerated up to 24 years. A handful of innocents have even been found on death row within days of execution. These occurrences leave no question that innocent lives will be lost to executions.

In a new system introduced to a region where one previously didn’t exist, as the topic states, where only those who are guilty beyond doubt of the most heinous of crimes are executed, this should never occur.

That the system would be guilty of the exact crime it attempts to punish is inherently hypocritical and immoral (see Cicero[4]). However, if inmates are incarcerated instead of executed, new evidence can be and has been used years later to exonerate wrongly-convicted individuals.

An innocent being held in prison – a self-contained society, occupied by those the outside society has deemed to be the very worst - for a quarter of a century, as cited, is no more or less immoral.

The following list contains additional moral difficulties with capital punishment:

• Makes anti-execution jurors less likely to convict, thereby eroding the judicial system.
• Unnecessarily punishes innocent family members
• Does nothing to rectify the wrongs committed
• Raises concerns with the mentally ill (see Charles Singleton[5])

Any conviction may be swayed by the feelings of a juror – whether the defendant is black, for example – and can punish innocent family members by incarcerating their kin. No custodial sentence rectifies wrongs, nor addresses those with mental illnesses.

Execution is Impractical

A New York Times survey verifies a government study showing that US states without capital punishment have lower murder rates than those with – indicating that capital punishment is not a deterrent. This may be because criminals often act irrationally and ignore potential consequences. The following are additional practical problems with execution:

• The average cost per inmate in the US is about $22,650 (USD)/year. The US executed 60 inmates in 2005. A similar execution rate in England would provide miniscule savings, even assuming no additional legal, incarceration, or execution costs. These savings pale in comparison to the $20 billion (USD)/year UK criminal justice system budget.
• Damages paid to wrongly-executed individuals’ families could be astronomical.
• Extensive legal battles or automatic appeals can substantially increase state costs.
• Protests often cost government time and money while reprieve is considered

True justice is not about price.

 

[a6m5]

I have just sent in my decision to ultrabeat. Good job, guys.

 

[Wenders]

I wont have time to read and decide til this time tomorrow. Got a halloween party to get myself ready for and then more than likely a hangover to get through when I wake.

 

[Sage]

When do we judges have to turn in our votes? I’m still undecided, and I think it’s going to take me a long, long time to choose…

 

[kennythebomb]

Excellent rebuttal, Famine.

 

[Wenders]

my vote has been submitted.

 

[Swift]

Wow, good stuff guys! I'm looking forward to the results.

 

[Dave A]

Speaking of which, when are the results due?

 

[Danny]

Once at least four of the judges get off their bee-hinds and vote.

 

[Sage]

I’ll send in a vote by the end of today (crazy day – test and enrollment).

 

[dougiemeats]

I'll send my vote very late tonight.

Sorry, but I've had 3 exams in 4 days so I've only had time to read over them once.

 

[Duke]

Jack appears to be hors de combat after a severe hand injury. Is there an alternate judge available?

 

[Danny]

dougiemeats vote could clinch it for one team, so we may not need it.

 

[Dave A]

You will however need another judge for all the other rounds as well, if I were you I'd get contacting someone that was interested but too late in the original interest thread. You will need to eventually regardless of if it's needed for this round or not.

 

[Danny]

Fair point. I'll run a few PMs round.

 

[kennythebomb]

Ahh I can't wait

 

[dougiemeats]

My vote has been submitted.

 

[Danny]

Danny, what is up? Here's my decision on "Heat 4"
------------------------------------------
Team AAMMM made many strong points on this one. Death penalty's failure as a deterrent, and also the lack of practicality were couple of really good ones. Also, there was one small slip up from Team B that I had to deduct points for. In response to Team AAMMM's argument regarding the minimal financial savings on death sentence vs. life sentence, Team B replied, "true justice is not about price", though in their original argument, they had made their points that life sentences does not remove the offender "fiscally". I sensed a small inconsistency there.

My vote goes to Team AAMMM. 👍

Another hard topic and well constructed arguments by both teams. They both made good arguments for and against having the death penalty however I do feel that Team AAMMM based their argument too much on statistics and particularly US statistics and not actually covering the debate topic - Should the Death Penalty be brought back to Europe? There are other countries that have the death penalty and not necessarily for the most heinous of crimes. I did like their rebuttal point to Teams A's argument about the death penalty acting as a deterant - 'Execution deters sensible people; however, sensible people do not commit horrible crimes.'

My vote goes to Team B as I feel that for me their argument was easier to read without all the references and statistics that team AAMMM used. I also feel that they put forward their argument in a way that showed they were talking about a creating a new system in Europe rather than fixing/changing an old system and also how the advancement in technology particluarly DNA evidence wont pose the same problems as in other countries in respect to overturning previous guilty convctions as the new convictions will be based on this new technology.

This was the toughest yet. I started to type up my nomination, then partway through my analysis, I started to question myself, and went back through the arguments and rebuttals with a fine-tooth comb, which only made me question myself more.

However, I’ve reached my conclusion.

Team AAMMM nailed it. I couldn’t find one thing wrong with either essay. A perfect 10.

Team B was 99% there. However, this one paragraph presented what was, to me, a slightly flakey argument:

“It ought to be noted that judiciary is imperfect and, with all trials, the wrong verdict can be reached. However, incorrectly locking someone away for the duration of their life is no more or less moral than their execution – they, and their families, have still lost a great deal, be it physical or temporal. Not executing someone because they might be innocent makes no more sense than not imprisoning someone for the same reason.”​

Imprisonment and execution aren’t totally analogous. After imprisonment, one can be freed; after execution, one can most definitely not be brought back and freed. I totally see the point Team B was trying to make, but the two topics simply aren’t parallel to me.

Having said that, my vote goes for Team AAMMM. Team B gets massive kudos from me though, because a) they had the more difficult stance (even though it’s the one I agree with), and b) they still managed to nip at the heels of Team AAMMM.

Congrats to both teams. 👍

Before reading through the arguments, I knew I had to put my own beliefs aside. I thought that Team AAMMM had a more convincing initial argument, and they concluded with a strong rebuttal. They cleverly chose points that were particularly difficult to counter, such as the possibility of an innocent human being executed. I was impressed by Team B's rebuttal, but they came up short by the smallest of margins. My decision is Team AAMMM.

Congratulations Team AAMMM!

 

[Danoff]

Thank you.

I also felt that Team B did an excellent job, so kudos to them.

I'd like to point out for the record that both Live4speed any myself are pro-capital punishment (I don't know about kennythebomb). However, I found it very surprising how easy it was to argue for the anti-capital punishment side.

I felt that we had the easier side of the debate, even though I don't agree with it. I didn't envy Famine and co. having to make what I felt would be a very abstract argument. I also found it difficult myself to argue with some of the points we raised (like execution leading to the death of innocents). Even though I think execution is just, it's difficult to counter the inevitability of being guilty of the same crime you punish.

An interesting, difficult topic. I think this is two-in-a-row that Team B had the toughest side of the debate.

 

[Danny]

I felt that we had the easier side of the debate, even though I don't agree with it. I didn't envy Famine and co. having to make what I felt would be a very abstract argument. I also found it difficult myself to argue with some of the points we raised (like execution leading to the death of innocents). Even though I think execution is just, it's difficult to counter the inevitability of being guilty of the same crime you punish.

An interesting, difficult topic. I think this is two-in-a-row that Team B had the toughest side of the debate.

It's really just a random thing. I don't really put that much thought into who gets what arguement,