Tiffany Lum, Kaylee Jurado

Mr. Buescher
Philosophy, Period 1
2 December 2015
Debates
Should the Death Penalty by Lethal Injection be legal nationwide?
OPENING STATEMENT
Introduction (3 Mins)
The Death penalty by lethal injection should be legal nationwide because it will deter future
crimes, put the families of the victims at peace, and prevent overcrowded prisons. It is less
expensive than housing those on death-row, restores just order, and the likelihood of
condemning an innocent person is low.
Deter Future Crimes
People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal
more than the fear of death, life in prison is less feared. Prison is an effective deterrent,
but with some people more is needed.
Murderers clearly prefer life in prison to execution, otherwise they would not try to
be sentenced to life in prison instead of death.
Therefore, a life sentence must be less deterrent than a death sentence, We
must execute murderers as long as it is merely possible that their execution protects
citizens from future murder.
Put the Families of the Victims at Peace
The death penalty gives closure to the victims families who have suffered so
much.
A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family
members.
Some family members of crime victims may take years or even decades to
recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Sadly, some may never fully recover.
1st Rebuttal (2 Mins)
Overcrowded Prisons
Prisons across the country face the problem of too many prisoners and not
enough space and resources.
It has been estimated that life without parole cases will cost $1.2 million to $3.6
million more than equivalent death penalty cases.
The upfront costs of the death penalty are significantly higher than for the
equivalent life without parole cases, but over time equivalent life without parole cases
are much more expensive than death penalty cases.
Expenses- Not as expensive as keeping all of them in prison
2nd Rebuttal (2 Mins)
DEFENDING

 Those against the death penalty may argue that its cruel and unusual
punishment, or unjust, however, it restores just order and therefore protects society
morally by making the wrongdoer pay a price equivalent to the harm he or she has done.
This is retribution, not to be confused with revenge, which is guided by a different
motive.
Retribution is the primary purpose of just punishment as such Rehabilitation,
protection, and deterrence have lesser status in punishment than retribution.

ATTACKING
Innocent People (Lying)
DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now
effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a persons guilt or innocence
No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all of the time.
Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof
The risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death
penalty causes is very minute and virtually nonexistent, there is no credible evidence to
show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty
was reactivated in 1976.
DNA testing is over 99 percent effective
Unjust
Simply because an execution method may result in pain, either by accident or as
an inescapable consequence of death, does not establish the sort of objectively
intolerable risk of harm that qualifies as cruel and unusual.
Our society has steadily moved to more humane methods of carrying out capital
punishment.
Open Forum (3 Mins)
Ask generic questions and questions based off of notes taken during the debate
A woman, by the name of Katy Davis was attacked by a man named Charles
Rector, on parole for a previous murder. The men ransacked her apartment, abducted
her, and took her to a lake where she was then beaten, gang-raped, shot in the head
and repeatedly forced underwater until she drowned.
-This man already took another persons life, and by being released, he was
given the chance to take another. The death penalty couldve prevented this, and saved Katy
Daviss life. Are you saying that what this man did is forgivable and deserves a long life, paid for
by innocent US citizens?
Closing Statement (2 Mins)
The Death penalty by lethal injection should be legal nationwide. It will deter future crimes, put
the families of the victims at peace, and prevent overcrowded prisons. It is less expensive than
housing those on death-row, restores just order, and the likelihood of condemning an innocent
person is extremely low. This retribution is saved for the worst of the worst, and for those who
earned it, those like Charles Rector.