The debate "Death penalty is the most effective way to lower certain crime rates" was started by
February 20, 2015, 12:46 am.
19 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
invincible_01 posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
invincible_01, Kinakuza, theguy, Wantonjon, resiliently, Armihakhan, river93x, Hollister_boy, Seraph, Superr1fifty and 9 visitors agree.
pagenewberry, I_Voyager, PsychDave, llthslvtr, joshuachaz and 3 visitors disagree.
such as corruption, serial killing, and terrorism(for me only those kind of crimes deserve death penalty for the criminals).
I do understand your concern about miss conviction, but I see that the chance is very low and rarely happen in countries that already using death penalties as the worst of the worst punishment(such as China, Saudi Arabia, etc). because as I know the process taken by the court before giving death penalty for criminal is very careful(looking for evidences, witnesses, etc).
I believe it's the most effective way to give detterence effects towards the "future criminals" because they will likely to feel afraid to do the crimes remembering the consequence is death. Therefore I belive it would lower the crime rates.
I can't agree without a) knowing which crime rates are the "certain crime rates" and b) knowing how you suggest we prevent innocent people from being executed for crimes they didn't commit (it is very hard to apologize for getting the wrong guy when you have already killed him.