英语有争议话题 死刑问题 正反方论点
- 格式:doc
- 大小:40.00 KB
- 文档页数:2
Death PenaltyOriginal ReportThe Original Report From Negative Side(Death Penalty Should not Exist)G ood 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 killpeople 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 amessage of "You killed one of us, so we'll kill you". The state is actually using a murder to punish 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 ad venture; cigarette smokers risk their lives for pleasure; spe eding drivers risk their lives in order to get to their de stinations a bit faster.”The same goes with criminals. Ifa 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 is2-5 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 thedeath 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! butwe don't think the abolition of the death penalty is the development of humancivilization.Those who make mistakes must pay theprice, so that our society can be inorder .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 ,butthis 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, butpremise 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.conclusionGood 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 de ath does not usually stop people from doing what they want to do. “Mountain climb ers 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 ReportThe 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 withoutpossibility 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 debating1,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.What’s more , We can let them do Labor Reformation in prison, to compensate for social.so,as for which one wastes more ,i know now you are agree with me!3,we think death penalty is a development ofour civilization,let’s have your opinion.Thank you for your question! but We as a society have to move away from the "eye for an eye" revenge mentality if civilization is to advance,because it will never solve anything.Why do you think the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been going on for 60+ years? Why do you think gang violence in this country never seems to end?Because the state is actually using a murder to punish someone who committed a murder. But you know whether that make sense.4,We use the death penalty to deter crime.Don’t u thinkthe existence of death penaltymakes people too fear to do malicious things?well ,yes , but infact,the effects are not as good as u expect .first,According to a investigation , in the nearly20 years , the crime rate didn’t decreased but even increa sed .second,Stephen Nathanson, the famous authorsaid , 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.”The same goes with criminals. If a criminal tends to kill somebody, He just lo st his reason , Nothing can stop him ,even the death penal ty.That’s all i want to say. thank you.conclusionDeath penalty should exist ( conclusion )Good afternoon, honorable judge, my dear fellow debaters , ladies and gentleman ,for summary according all the factors ,we do believe that death penalty should exist.As all the nations are trying to build a law-governed society, death penalty can work as a powerful legal method to guarantee thestability of society and protect the right of the majority of people. People create law to regulate and better serve the society. Law gives the government right to end a people’s life legally with thefundamental aim to reduce crime. It is true death penalty is a way to punish criminals,death penalty exists because we want to prevent others from committing crime. All the things should have a limitation, including humanism. The statement that death penalty should be abolished is in fact a blind pursuit of humanism. It is impossible to guarantee the right of all the people, so we need death penalty to protect as many people as we can. To put an extreme criminal who does not feel sorry about what he or she has done is not against the idea of humanism, because the one who invade the rights of others to an extreme degree has no standpoint to ask for equal rights. To give up putting an extreme criminal to death so easily is against the equality of life and invades the victims’ dignity of life.We strongly support the idea that death penalty should exist. That is all, thank you.参考(有道ps...)The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much. Some family members of crime victims may take years or decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Some may never recover. One of the things that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members.1。
应该废除死刑吗英语作文英文回答:Should the death penalty be abolished? This is a question that has sparked intense debate and controversy around the world. On one hand, proponents argue that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime and ensures that the most heinous criminals are permanently removed from society. On the other hand, opponents argue that the death penalty violates the right to life and that there is a risk of executing innocent individuals.Those in favor of abolishing the death penalty argue that it is a violation of human rights. Every individual has the right to life, regardless of their actions. Taking someone's life as a form of punishment is seen as a barbaric and outdated practice. Additionally, there is always the risk of executing innocent people. Mistakes can and have been made in the past, leading to the wrongful execution of individuals. This is a grave injustice thatcannot be undone.Furthermore, the death penalty does not necessarily serve as a deterrent to crime. Studies have shown that the presence of the death penalty does not significantly lower crime rates. Instead, it is more effective to focus on prevention, rehabilitation, and addressing the root causes of crime. By investing in education, social programs, and support systems, we can create a society where individuals are less likely to turn to crime in the first place.In contrast, proponents of the death penalty argue that it is necessary for justice and ensuring the safety of society. They believe that certain crimes are so heinous that the only appropriate punishment is death. The death penalty serves as a deterrent, sending a strong message to potential criminals that their actions will not be tolerated. Additionally, it provides closure to thevictims' families, knowing that the perpetrator will never be able to harm anyone else.However, despite these arguments, I believe that thedeath penalty should be abolished. It is a violation of human rights and there is always a risk of executing innocent individuals. Moreover, it does not effectively deter crime. Instead, we should focus on prevention, rehabilitation, and addressing the root causes of crime. By doing so, we can create a more just and compassionate society.中文回答:应该废除死刑吗?这个问题在世界各地引发了激烈的辩论和争议。
英语辩论赛:是否应该执行死刑(反方四辩总结)第一篇:英语辩论赛:是否应该执行死刑(反方四辩总结)Good afternoon,Mr judge,honorable opposition and my humble partners.This house believes that death penalty should not be applied.Death penalty advocates have used the economic standpoint to make their case.Just as the opposition said.More convicts means more prisons which means more money.By killing murderers, we can save money!By this rational, we should execute all convicts and have no prisons!Think of the money we would save!Abviously, we can not put a price on a human life.The most common point held by death penalty supporters is that it has the effect of deterrence.But there is no convincing research that can show how death penalty functions better than life imprisonment.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.I believe that death penalty should not be applied.Firstly , The death penalty is a violation of our most radical 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 ends ,even if it is our country.Two wrongs don't make a right.Secondly , The purpose of death penalty is to prevent people from breaking the laws ,but the effects are not as good as we expect.According a investigation , in the nearly 20 years , the crime rate didn’t decreas ed or even increased.Thirdly ,the death penalty is irreversible, which is unlike all other punishments.There is a lot of evidence showing that many innocent people are often convicted of crimes, some of which even have been executed.Fourthly , we have to doubt what the meaning of death penalty actually is.There is no doubt that it gets some sort of revenge on a criminal, however, we should think over whether a model society should seek revenge.Fifthly , The criminal is not the only one who has to face the punishment.It is unjust for his/her family who have to go through the loss of a loved one.From above, I insist we should abolish the death penalty, because it is outdated, and it denies basic human rights.Today, more than 100 countries have abolished the death penalty.If some countries can, why can’t the rest? I insist that death penalty should not be applied.Thank you!第二篇:【原创】知足常乐辩论赛反方四辩总结总结陈词谢谢,大家好!其实刚才一连串的争论都起源于对方开展论题时所犯下的几个关键性错误。
Mercy killing is one of the most controversial issues in the world of medicine. As the picture given above depicts, A late sick mother desperately ill son request for euthanasia. But the son was cut for this。
feeling helpless because he is at a loss what to do about it.The picture really sets me thinking. It implies that people differ in their attitudes towards the mercy killing.Some people think it is right.but others dont think so.now let us listen to everyone's different opinions安乐死是医学界最有争议的问题之一。
正如上面所示的视频所描绘的,一位晚期患病母亲病入膏肓,请求儿子实施安乐死。
但儿子且为此获罪,感到无能为力,因为他们不知道该怎么办。
这幅画确实发人深省。
它暗示,人们在对待安乐死上看法不一致。
有些人认为他是对的,但其他的不这样认为,现在让我们听听大家的不同观点赞成1.If a person loses the survivability of the community has not contributed to lose the meaning of life.reduce reliance on others and a burden on society.如果一个人失去了生存能力,对社会没有了贡献,也就失去了生命的意义,减少对别人的倚赖和对社会的负担。
应该废除死刑吗英语作文英文回答:Should the death penalty be abolished? This is a complex and controversial question that has been debatedfor many years. Personally, I believe that the death penalty should be abolished for several reasons.Firstly, the death penalty is irreversible. Once a person is executed, there is no way to undo the punishment if new evidence emerges that proves their innocence. This has happened in numerous cases, where individuals have been wrongfully convicted and later exonerated due to DNA evidence or other factors. For example, in 2014, a man named Glenn Ford was released from death row in Louisiana after spending 30 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit. This highlights the inherent flaws and risks associated with the death penalty.Secondly, the death penalty does not deter crimeeffectively. Many studies have shown that there is no significant difference in crime rates between countries or states that have the death penalty and those that do not. For instance, the United States, which still practices capital punishment in some states, has a higher murder rate compared to many European countries that have abolished the death penalty. This suggests that the threat of death penalty does not deter individuals from committing serious crimes.Furthermore, the death penalty is often applied disproportionately to certain groups, such as racial minorities and individuals from low-income backgrounds. This raises concerns about fairness and justice in the criminal justice system. For example, a study conducted by the American Civil Liberties Union found that African Americans are more likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants, especially when the victim is white. This racial bias undermines the integrity and equality of the legal system.In addition, the death penalty is costly and a burdenon taxpayers. The lengthy appeals process and the high security measures required for death row inmates result in significant financial expenses. For example, a study conducted in California estimated that the state could save $1 billion over five years by abolishing the death penalty. These funds could be better allocated to improving education, healthcare, or other social programs thatbenefit society as a whole.In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished due to its irreversible nature, lack of deterrence, potential for discrimination, and financial burden. It is important to focus on alternative forms of punishment that prioritize rehabilitation and justice rather than retribution. By doing so, we can create a more just and humane society.中文回答:应该废除死刑吗?这是一个复杂而有争议的问题,多年来一直存在争论。
Should death penalty be abolished or not?I think it should not be accepted because there might be people who go to jail to pay for the crimes other committed and it would be very unfair to kill someone who are innocent. I think that people who are very bad and who have such deep mental problems and kill people like Murderers should stay in Jail forever!In my opinion, it shouldn't be abolished. Those who make mistakes or 'blunders' must get paid so that our society has a good-conditioned order, just the same as the way we keep prisoners in prison from freedom. If there is any problem about it, it's the law's fault, but not the penalty itself.I believe in the death penalty. Like the saying goes, Eye for an eye. If someone intentionally does bodily harm to kill someone. Then they are giving up their right to live themselves. Why put them in jail for life and us tax payers fit the bill.I believe the death penalty should be abolished. In the Ten Commandments, it states, "Thou shall not kill". However, the government says it is all right to kill a murderer. "Do as I say not as I do"? There is no proof that the death penalty deters crime. Also, innocent people are sentenced to the death penalty and executed. I agree about the financial burdens. It has been proven that it is cheaper to sentence a criminal to life in prison than to the death penalty.I think the Death Penalty should still stand. Why keep a murderer alive after taking an innocent life? The appeals are there for the wrongfully convicted, but if they're caught at the scene, or have items leading to the murder, they should be sentenced to death, not life in prison. The longer we keep them alive, the higher our taxes become. When they appeal, the money should be out of their OWN pockets. Why should a murderer deserve to breathe the air that we do after committing such a heinous crime? WE pay to keep them alive. Why should we pay to keep them that way?In r eal life , ther e are still very serious crimes of endangering national security , endan ger public safety, civil rights violations , undermine social order . The existence of the death penalty system is conducive(有益于)to crack down(镇压)and punish these crimes , thus strongly on major interests of the state and the people be pr otected .The existence of the death penalty system is also conducive to achieving the purpose of punishment . For those who commit the most heinous criminals of various types , and only apply the death penalty ( including the reprieve ) , so that he can not or dare no t crime , special precautions so as to achieve the purpose of punishment .Does urbanization do more good than bad?。
应不应该废除死刑-英语-辩论赛Debate motion: wether death penalty should be abolished or not?A(应保留): Our debate motion today is whether death penalty should be abolished or not. My side insist that it should not. Death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a felony. As early as there is a law, death penalty has come into being. Even in modern society, it is still necessary. As all the nations are trying to build a law-governed society, death penalty can work as a powerful legal method to guarantee the stability of society and protect the right of the majority of people. A criminal may stop halfway as soon as he thinks up that death is the most likely outcome of his criminal acts.B(应废除): While the government should punish the crime,but we should not curb the violence with violence.The right to life is the most essential human rights, all of the rights are on premise of life.Criminals should enjoy life rights as the same as ordinary people.And there is no any evidence show that the incident of cases have inevitable connection with the existing of capital punishment so far. And the death penalty is not more deterrent than life imprisonment. Long terms of Imprisonment have the similar effect in In terms of crime prevention.A: My opponent say that death penalty cannot deter crime, since there is no obvious increase in crime rate after death penalty is abolished.Many variables make it hard to tell what the exact influence of death penalty has on crime rates. In addition, according to New York Times, there is only one death penalty in 300 murders. Lack of samples also makes the statistics unreliable. So there is no direct proof that can deny the deterrence of death penalty.However, those countries which banned death penalty always have a high democracy index as well as a high human development index.B: Besides being Influenced by the uncultured homomorphic revenge, death penalty has another problem---- false adjudications. False adjudications cause many innocents dead not only in abroad but also in homeland. According to New York Times' statistics,in late 20 years, about 102 innocents was sentenced to death in the U.S.Our country also has such bloody lessons during the Cultural Revolution.What’smore, there is no opportunity to remedy the consequences of misjudgment of the death penalty.A: My opponent also mention erroneous adjudications. But nothing can be perfect. We should not abolish death penalty just because a tiny possibility of erroneous adjudications. Especially when we have other ways to reduce erroneous adjudications, like to investigate more carefully or improve the law.B: Besides this aspect,every law should suit the people's wish. Abolishing death penalty is the demand of international society and the people.According a survey from china survey,65.8% netizens approved of banning,only 34.1% insisted on remaining. From all the data above,we can draw a conclusion that banning the capital punishment is not only international demand,but also the people's needs.A: Since we mention the people's needs here,we could not forget the victim and their families' needs .To give up putting an extreme criminal to death so easily is against the equality of life and invades the victims’dignity of life. It's better to protect casualty rights than protect the criminal human rights.B: If one day the death penalty has no longer necessary, it will be a new chapter of the history of human civilization. of course,it will be a long process.But now,we also need to constantly improve our laws, not to put any innocent person to death execution ground.。
死刑没有阻止犯罪capital punishment is immoral in all cases because it takes a human life and amounts to state-sanctioned murder.死刑在所有案件中都是不道德的,因为它需要一个人的生命,也相当于国家认可的谋杀。
“the death penalty remains fraught with arbitrariness, discrimination, caprice and mistake.”“死亡”惩罚仍然充满了任意性、歧视、任性和错误。
poor people unable to afford adequate legal representation and minorities subject to racial prejudice.在死刑裁决中,穷人无力支付足够的法律代表权,少数民族受种族偏见的影响。
•that mercy is ethically superior to justice (which they call “revenge”);•that all human life—even that of a killer—has “intrinsic value,” so that it’s immoral to take another’s life under any circumstances; and•that society’s response to a crime shouldn’t be proportionate to the harm caused by the criminal, but governed by other considerations.•这种仁慈在道德上优于正义(他们称之为“复仇”);•所有人类的生命具有“内在价值”•社会对犯罪的反应不应与犯罪所造成的伤害成比例,而是由其他因素来决定。
应不应该废除死刑英语正方辩论赛辩词一辩、二辩、三辩、四辩发言稿一辩:Ladies and gentlemen, today we are here to discuss whether the death penalty should be abolished. As the first speaker of the affirmative side, I strongly believe that the death penalty should be abolished. Firstly, the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime. Studies have shown that countries without the death penalty have lower crime rates than those that still practice it. In addition, many criminals who commit capital offenses do not consider the consequences of their actions, so the threat of death may not deter them.Secondly, the justice system is not perfect, and innocent people have been sentenced to death in the past. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, since 1973, over 160 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence was discovered. The risk of executing an innocent person is unacceptable and cannot be justified.Lastly, the death penalty is a violation of human rights. The right to life is a fundamental human right that should be protected by the state. The state should not have the power to take away someone's life, regardless of the severity of their crimes.In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished because it is not an effective deterrent to crime, innocent people have been sentenced to death, and it is a violation of human rights.二辩:Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. As the second speaker of the affirmative side, I would like to further support the argument that the death penalty should be abolished.Firstly, the death penalty is not cost-effective. The cost of a death penalty trial is much higher than that of a non-capital trial due to the lengthy appeals process and the cost of keeping the offender on death row. This money could be better spent on improving the criminal justice system or on programs that can prevent crime. Secondly, the death penalty is often used disproportionately against certain groups, such as minorities and the poor. This is a clear violation of the principle of equal justice under the law.Thirdly, the death penalty is not necessary to protect society. Life imprisonment without parole is an adequate punishment for even the most heinous crimes.Lastly, the death penalty is not supported by most of the world's democracies. In fact, the majority of countries have abolished the death penalty, and the trend is moving towards its abolition worldwide. In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished because it is notcost-effective, it is often used disproportionately against certain groups, it is not necessary to protect society, and it is not supported by most of the world's democracies.三辩:Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. As the first speaker of the negative side, I would like to argue that the death penalty should not be abolished.Firstly, the death penalty is a just punishment for the most heinous crimes. Some crimes, such as murder, are so egregious that they warrant the ultimate punishment. The death penalty is the only appropriate punishment for such crimes.Secondly, the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime. Knowing that they could face the death penalty may deter potential criminals from committing capital offenses. The threat of the death penalty can also prevent convicted murderers from committing further crimes while in prison.Thirdly, the death penalty provides closure for victims' families. The families of murder victims often feel that the death penalty is the only way to achieve justice and closure for their loved one's death. Lastly, the death penalty is supported by the majority of the American public. According to a Gallup poll, 55% of Americans support the death penalty for convicted murderers.a just punishment for the most heinous crimes, it serves as a deterrent to crime, it provides closure for victims' families, and it is supported by the majority of the American public.四辩:Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. As the second speaker of the negative side, I would like to further support the argument that the death penalty should not be abolished.Firstly, the death penalty is an important tool for law enforcement. It allows prosecutors to negotiate plea bargains with defendants, which can result in valuable information that can help solve other crimes. Secondly, the death penalty provides justice for society as a whole. The punishment of the most heinous crimes sends a message that society will not tolerate such behavior and helps to maintain law and order.Thirdly, the death penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, and lethal injection is a painless and humane method of execution.Lastly, the death penalty is not a violation of human rights. The right to life is not an absolute right, and the state has the right to use the death penalty in certain circumstances.an important tool for law enforcement, it provides justice for society as a whole, it is not cruel and unusual punishment, and it is not a violation of human rights.。
论述重刑主义的利弊英语作文英文回答:Capital Punishment: Pros and Cons.Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a highly controversial topic that has been debated for centuries. It is a legal form of punishment in which a person convicted of a serious crime is sentenced to death. The debate surrounding capital punishment centers aroundits efficacy as a deterrent, its moral implications, and the risk of wrongful convictions.Pros of Capital Punishment.1. Deterrence:Proponents argue that capital punishment acts as a powerful deterrent against serious crimes, particularly murder. The threat of execution is believed to preventindividuals from committing heinous crimes.2. Retribution and Justice:Some believe that capital punishment serves a just and retributive purpose. They contend that the ultimate penalty is a fitting response to the most heinous crimes, such as murder, aggravated assault, or treason.3. Incapacitation:The death penalty permanently removes dangerous criminals from society. It ensures that they can no longer pose a threat to the public.Cons of Capital Punishment.1. Moral Implications:Many opponents of capital punishment question its morality. They argue that it is cruel and inhumane to intentionally take a life, regardless of the crimecommitted.2. Risk of Wrongful Convictions:Despite advances in forensic science, there is always a risk of wrongful convictions. In cases involving the death penalty, the consequences of an erroneous conviction are irreversible.3. Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities:Studies have shown that racial and socioeconomic disparities exist in the application of capital punishment. People of color and individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds are disproportionately represented among those sentenced to death.4. Expensive and Time-Consuming:The death penalty is significantly more expensive and time-consuming than life imprisonment. The lengthy appeals process can prolong the legal proceedings for years,incurring substantial financial costs.5. Lack of Deterrent Effect:Research has provided mixed evidence on whether capital punishment actually deters crime. Some studies suggest that it has little or no effect on crime rates.Conclusion:The debate over capital punishment is complex and involves a multitude of perspectives. While someindividuals believe that it is a just and effective punishment, others question its morality and argue for alternatives such as life imprisonment without parole. The decision of whether or not to retain capital punishment is ultimately a societal choice that must be made with careful consideration of its potential benefits and drawbacks.中文回答:死刑的利弊。
The Pros and Cons of Capital PunishmentCapital punishment or the death penalty is the act of killing or executing a person, who was found guilty of a serious crime, by the government. Capital punishment has been a way of punishing people since ages. Although there are some countries that have abolished death penalty from their law, there are still many which still practice the act of killing a person for crime. Capital punishment is prevalent in the US, Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Some of the ways of executing criminals are hanging, shooting, electrocution and giving lethal injections. Without a doubt, executions are considered the ultimate punishment for a crime, because there is no repeal from death. The logical alternative for capital punishment is life in prison without parole, yet a lot of nations still perform the death penalty. This is because the debate whether capital punishment is ethical and justifiable is still widely disputed. While some think that death penalty is necessary for those who have committed a terrible crime, there are others who consider it as an immoral act that goes against the values of humanity.Therefore, let’s review each reason for and against capital punishment to determine if it is ethical and logical.Reasons For Capital Punishment1.Prison: There are three purposes for prison. First, prison separates criminals for the safetyof the general population. Second, prison is a form of punishment. Third and finally, the punishment of prison is expected to rehabilitate prisoners; so that when prisoners are released from prison, these ex-convicts are less likely to repeat their crimes and risk another prison sentence. The logic for capital punishment is that prisons are for rehabilitating convicts who will eventually leave prison, and therefore prison is not for people who would never be released from prisons alive.2.Cost of Prison:Typically, the cost of imprisoning someone for life is much more expensive thanexecuting that same person. However with the expensive costs of appeals in courts of law, it is arguable if capital punishment is truly cost effective when compared with the cost of life imprisonment.3.Safety: Criminals who receive the death penalty are typically violent individuals. Thereforefor the safety of the prison’s guards, other prisoners, and the general public (in case a death row inmate escapes prison), then logic dictates that safety is a reason for capital punishment.If a criminal is jailed, he may again commit the same crime after being released from prison.Giving him capital punishment would make sure that the society is safe from being attacked by criminals. It seems to be an appropriate punishment for serial killers and for those who continue to commit crimes even after serving imprisonment.4.Deter crime: A person who has committed a crime like killing or raping another person shouldbe given death penalty, which is as severe punishment as the act. It is said that when a criminal is given a capital punishment, it dissuades others in the society from committing such serious crimes. They would refrain from such crimes due to fear of losing their lives. This would definitely help in reducing crime rate in society.5.Extreme Punishment: The logic is that the more severe the crime, then the more severe thepunishment is necessary. But what is the most severe punishment: lifetime in prison or execution?I am not sure that anyone alive is qualified to answer this question.6.Appropriate Punishment: It is commonly believed that the punishment of a crime should equalthe crime, if possible. This is also known as "an eye for eye" justice. Therefore using this logic, the appropriate punishment for murder is death.7.Vengeance: Some crimes are so horrific that some people think that revenge or retribution isthe only option. Some people strongly believe that a person who has taken the life of anotherperson does not have a right to live. Sentencing such a criminal can give relief to the family members of the victim that their loved one has obtained justice.This reasoning is not based on logic; but rather, it is based on emotions. Therefore, this reason should not be deemed a valid justification.Reasons Against Capital Punishment1.No deter crime.There is no scientific proof that nations with capital punishment have a lowerrate of crime, therefore the risk of the death penalty does not seem to deter crime.2.Not Humane: Killing a person is not humane, even if the criminal is not humane. What is humaneis subjective to a person’s upbringing, education, beliefs, and religion. Therefore different people interpret what is humane differently. For instance, some people consider putting a pet asleep is humane if the animal is in great pain, but doing the same thing for a person is often not considered humane. Other people would not kill an animal even for food. In some cultures, mercy killings are honorable.3.Fairness: The life of the criminal can not compensate for the crime committed. Basically, twowrongs do not make a right.4.Pain of Death: Executing a person can be quick and painless, or executing a person can be slowand painful. The method, and therefore the pain, of capital punishment is also subjective to society’s norms. Some cultures prefer suffering, others do not.5.Violates Human Rights:Some groups of people deem death a violation of the person’s right tolive. Other groups of people disagree that the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment.There is no clear definition of what human rights are, so there will always be disagreements with whether it violates human rights.6.Wrongly Convicted:Some people executed were proven too late to be wrongly convicted of a crimethat they did not commit. Usually, it has been seen that poor people have to succumb to death penalty as they cannot afford good lawyers to defend their stance. There are very rare cases of rich people being pronounced capital punishment. Also, an individual from minoritycommunities are more likely to be given death penalty.7.Playing God:Some people believe that all deaths should be natural. Other people believe murderis a part of nature.8.Salvation: Felons have less time and likelihood of finding spiritual salvation if they areexecuted. The obvious question for this reasoning is salvation a valid concern for the state?9.Forgiveness: Criminals have less time and likelihood to seek forgiveness for their crimes ifthey are executed. Again, is forgiveness a valid concern for the government?10.Amends:Executing someone decreases the time and likelihood for the criminal to repair any damagefrom the crime. Should the state be concerned over this too?11.Family Hardship: It is often said that the family members of the executed needlessly suffertoo, yet the crime itself has victims and family members too.In the end, it is what the majority of society currently believes to be moral that should be reflected by the actions of their government.。