Death Penalty Pros & Cons
Top 10 Pros and Cons
Should the death penalty be allowed?
The PRO and CON statements below give a five minute introduction to the death penalty debate.
(Read more information about our one star to five star Theoretical Credibility System)
1. Morality
2. Constitutionality
3. Deterrence
4. Retribution
5. Irrevocable Mistakes
6. Cost of Death vs. Life in Prison
7. Race
8. Income Level
9. Attorney Quality
10. Physicians at Execution
PRO Death Penalty CON Death Penalty
1. Morality
PRO: "The crimes of rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, murder, larceny, and perjury pivot on a moral code that escapes apodictic [indisputably true] proof by expert testimony or otherwise. But communities would plunge into anarchy if they could not act on moral assumptions less certain than that the sun will rise in the east and set in the west. Abolitionists may contend that the death penalty is inherently immoral because governments should never take human life, no matter what the provocation. But that is an article of faith, not of fact. The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense." CON: "Ultimately, the moral question surrounding capital punishment in America has less to do with whether those convicted of violent crime deserve to die than with whether state and federal governments deserve to kill those whom it has imprisoned. The legacy of racial apartheid, racial bias, and ethnic discrimination is unavoidably evident in the administration of capital punishment in America. Death sentences are imposed in a criminal justice system that treats you better if you are rich and guilty than if you are poor and innocent. This is an immoral condition that makes rejecting the death penalty on moral grounds not only defensible but necessary for those who refuse to accept unequal or unjust administration of punishment."
2.
Should the death penalty be allowed?
The PRO and CON statements below give a five minute introduction to the death penalty debate.
(Read more information about our one star to five star Theoretical Credibility System)
1. Morality
2. Constitutionality
3. Deterrence
4. Retribution
5. Irrevocable Mistakes
6. Cost of Death vs. Life in Prison
7. Race
8. Income Level
9. Attorney Quality
10. Physicians at Execution
PRO Death Penalty CON Death Penalty
1. Morality
PRO: "The crimes of rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, murder, larceny, and perjury pivot on a moral code that escapes apodictic [indisputably true] proof by expert testimony or otherwise. But communities would plunge into anarchy if they could not act on moral assumptions less certain than that the sun will rise in the east and set in the west. Abolitionists may contend that the death penalty is inherently immoral because governments should never take human life, no matter what the provocation. But that is an article of faith, not of fact. The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense." CON: "Ultimately, the moral question surrounding capital punishment in America has less to do with whether those convicted of violent crime deserve to die than with whether state and federal governments deserve to kill those whom it has imprisoned. The legacy of racial apartheid, racial bias, and ethnic discrimination is unavoidably evident in the administration of capital punishment in America. Death sentences are imposed in a criminal justice system that treats you better if you are rich and guilty than if you are poor and innocent. This is an immoral condition that makes rejecting the death penalty on moral grounds not only defensible but necessary for those who refuse to accept unequal or unjust administration of punishment."
2.