Death-Penalty死刑英文辩论.doc

Death Penalty Original Report The Original Report From Negative Side (Death Penalty Should not 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 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 kill people 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 a message of You killed one of us, so well kill you. The state is actually using a murder to punish someone who committed a murder. Does that make sense?Second, withthe growth of knowledge,we can easily find that the death penaltycan not be an effective deterrentfor serious crimes.StephenNathanson,theauthorof“AnEyeforanEye”said,“Mountainclimbersrisktheirlivesforthrillandadventure;cigarettesmokersrisktheirlivesforpleasure;speedingdriversrisktheirlivesinordertogettotheirdestinationsabitfaster.”Thesamegoeswithcriminals.Ifacriminaltendstokillsomebody,Hejustlosthisreason,Nothingcanstophim,eventhedeathpenalty.Furthermore,financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is 2-5 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 penaltyin our country,is the result of humanization,and ahigher level of understanding of punishment.So,our country should abolish the death penalty.free debating 问题一 Todays data shows that life imprisonment could achieve the same effect as the death penalty and its more humanity .so,my dear fellow debaters ,i would be glad to hear your opinion . thats a good point.but i cant entirely agree,First,the use of life imprisonment willbring enormous pressure toour countrys financial costs. Countries havetouse taxpayers money forbasic necessities of prisoners. furthermore,Chinais aresource- poor country. second,in fact,life imprisonmentis more cruel than death penalty. You say the death penaltyis inhumane,but being imprisoned for lifelets the criminals livewithout hope,isnt it a kind ofinhuman?In the view of personal point,death penalty is inhuman than life imprisonment ,but,in the view of country life imprisonment is inhuman ,dont 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! butwedontthinktheabolitionofthedeathpenaltyisthedevelopment of human civilization.Thosewhomakemistakesmustpay the price,sothatoursocietycan be in order .Whyshouldamurdererdeservetobreathetheair? Whyshouldwepayour money tokeepthemthatway? Do you agree that ? I m sure you are agree me .问题三Dont you think death penalty will lead the criminals family in great trouble?Well ,yes ,but this 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 isnt 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 thisis to bringmore victimsand more pain. The abolition of the death penaltyon thecriminalsis agood choice.But it isagreat hidden dangerto society. So this returns to thebenefit between the collective and the individual,I thinkthere is no need torepeat.问题四:If you killed someone, do you want to have a second chance to repay community?Of course, you said very reasonable, but premise 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 cant make experiment with the personal safety.Thats all i want to say. thank you.conclusionGoodmorning, honorable judge, my dear fellow debaters ,ladies and gentleman , Im 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 deathpenaltyshouldnotbeapplied.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.Deathpenaltysends the wrong message :why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.Thedeathpenaltyisaviolationofourhumanrights.Therighttoliveisabasicrightofeveryhumanbeing,andnomanhastherighttodecidewhenalifeshould be over,evenifitisourcountry.what is more,thepurposeofdeathpenaltyistopreventpeoplefrombreakingthelaws; butin fact,theeffectsarenotasgoodasweexpect.Accordingto ainvestigation,inthenearly 20years,thecrimeratedidntdecreasedbutevenincreased.AccordingtoStephenNathanson,theauthorof“AnEyeforanEye”,thefearofdeathdoesnotusuallystoppeoplefromdoingwhattheywanttodo.“Mountainclimbersrisktheirlivesforthrillandadventure;cigarettesmokersrisktheirlivesforpleasure;speedingdriversrisktheirlivesinordertogettotheirdestinationsabitfaster.”Thesamegoeswithcriminals.Ifacriminaltendstokillsomebody,Hejustlosthisreason,Nothingcanstophim,eventhedeathpenalty.Thirdly,Thecriminalisnottheonlyonewhohastofacethepunishment.The prisoners family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death at the same time.However,itsunjustforhis/herfamilyto get emotional punishment .So ,fromour analysis,we can say deathpenalty shouldnotbeapplied.Thankyou!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, doesnt 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 without possibility 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 stronglysupport that Death Penalty Should Exist.Thank you!free debating1,Wethinkdeathpenaltybanthecriminal from making mistakes againradically, what do u think about it? thats a good point.but i cant 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,its clear that we can banthecriminal ,for only we educate them rather than kill them,2,Ifwedontadoptdeathpenalty,but life sentence，dont u think its a waste to us to spend our taxes to raise criminals？im 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. Whats 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 thinkdeathpenaltyisadevelopment of ourcivilization,lets 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.Dont u think theexistenceofdeathpenalty makespeopletoofeartodomaliciousthings？well ,yes , butin fact,theeffectsarenotasgoodasuexpect.first,Accordingto ainvestigation,inthenearly 20years,thecrimeratedidntdecreasedbutevenincreased.second,StephenNathanson,thefamous author said ,thefearofdeathdoesnotusuallystoppeoplefromdoingwhattheywanttodo.“Mountainclimbersrisktheirlivesforthrillandadventure.”Thesamegoeswithcriminals.Ifacriminaltendstokillsomebody,Hejustlosthisreason,Nothingcanstophim,eventhedeathpenalty.Thats all i want to say. thank you.conclusion Death 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 the stability 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 peoples life legally with the fundamental 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 victims 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。死刑关闭了受害者的家庭遭受了这么多。一些犯罪受害者的家属可能需要几年或几十年从震惊中恢复过来,并失去所爱的人。有些人可能无法恢复的一件事,帮助加速经济复苏是实现某种关闭。终身监禁只是意味着犯罪仍在困扰着受害者。死刑带给一个可怕的结局章这些家庭成员的生活。 2. It creates another form of crime deterrent. Crime would run rampant as never before if there wasnt some way to deter people from committing the acts. Prison time is an effective deterrent, but with some people, more is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. 它创造了另一种形式的犯罪的威慑。犯罪会泛滥成灾，从未有过如果没有办法阻止人们犯罪行为。监狱的时间是一个有效的威慑力，但对有些人来说，更是需要的。检察官应该使用各种惩罚，为了减少犯罪的选项。Justice is better served. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, doesnt it make sense that the punishment for the perpetrator also be death? 正义是更好的服务。正义的最基本原则是罪刑相适应。当有人计划和残忍地杀害了另外一个人，没有道理，对犯罪者的惩罚也会死吗？Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. Its time we put the emphasis of our criminal justice system back on protecting the victim rather than the accused. Remember, a person whos on death row has almost always committed crimes before this. A long line of victims have been waiting for justice. We need justice for current and past victims.我们的司法系统显示更多的同情而不是罪犯的受害者。我们把我们的刑事司法系统的重点在保护受害者而不是指责时间。记住，一个人对死刑的人几乎都犯了罪，在这之前。一长排的受害者都是在等待正义。我们需要为当前和过去的受害者正义。 5. It provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence. What about people already sentenced to life in prison. Whats to stop them from murdering people constantly while in prison? What are they going to do-extend their sentences? Sure, they can take away some prison privileges, but is this enough of a deterrent to stop the killing? What about a person sentenced to life who happens to escape? Whats to stop him from killing anyone who might try to bring him in or curb his crime spree? 它为囚犯提供了一种威慑已经服无期徒刑。人已经被判处终身监禁。是什么阻止他们谋杀人不断在监狱里吗?他们要做扩展的句子是什么?当然,监狱可以带走一些特权,但这是足够的威慑阻止杀戮吗?怎么一个人判处终身而逃脱?是什么阻止他杀死的人可能试图带他或抑制疯狂犯罪吗?DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a persons guilt or innocence. One of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is the possibility of error. Sure, we can never completely eliminate all uncertainty, but nowadays, its about as close as you can get. DNA testing is over 99 percent effective. And even if DNA testing and other such scientific methods didnt exist, the trial and appeals process is so thorough its next to impossible to convict an innocent person. Remember, a jury of 12 members must unanimously decide theres not even a reasonable doubt the person is guilty. The number of innocent people that might somehow be convicted is no greater than the number of innocent victims of the murderers who are set free. DNA测试和其他现代犯罪现场科学的方法可以有效地消除几乎所有的不确定性,对一个人的有罪或无罪。最大的一个反对死刑是错误的可能性。当然,我们永远不可能完全消除所有的不确定性,但现在,它是关于尽可能密切。DNA测试是99%有效的。即使DNA测试等科学方法不存在,审判和上诉过程是如此彻底的是几乎不可能的罪犯一个无辜的人。请记住,12陪审团成员必须一致决定也没有合理怀疑的人有罪。无辜的人的数量可能会以某种方式被定罪的数量没有超过无辜受害者的凶手是谁释放。Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. Perhaps the biggest reason to keep the death penalty is to prevent the crime from happening again. The parole system nowadays is a joke. Does it make sense to anyone outside the legal system to have multiple life sentences + 20 years or other liverish? Even if a criminal is sentenced to life without possibility of parole, he still has a chance to kill while in prison, or even worse, escape and go on a crime/murder spree. 罪犯假释或逃会给罪犯一次机会杀死。保持死刑也许最大的原因是防止犯罪再次发生。如今假释制度是一个笑话。它有意义的法律体系以外的任何人有多个“生命”的句子+ 20年或其他jiverish吗?即使犯罪判处终身没有假释,他仍然有机会杀死在监狱里,或者更糟的是,逃了出来,疯狂犯罪/谋杀。It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Prisons across the country face the problem of too many prisoners and not enough space & resources. Each additional prisoner requires a portion of a cell, food, clothing, extra guard time, and so on. 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. 它导致人口过剩的问题在全国监狱系统。监狱面临的问题太多的犯人和没有足够的空间和资源。每个额外的囚犯需要细胞的一部分,食物,衣服,额外的保护,等等。当你消除死刑作为一个选项,这意味着必须安置囚犯的生活。因此,它只增加了一个过度拥挤的监狱系统的问题。It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system. The number of criminal cases that are plea bargained (meaning the accused admits guilt in return for a lesser sentence or some other concession) can be as high as 80 or 90 percent of cases. With the time, cost, and personnel requirements of a criminal case, there really isnt much of a choice. The vast majority of people that are arraigned are in fact guilty of the crime they are accused. Even if you believe a defendant only deserves life in prison, without the threat of a death sentence, there may be no way to get him to plead guilty and accept the sentence. If a case goes to trial, in addition to the enormous cost, you run the chance that you may lose the case, meaning a violent criminal gets off scot free. The existence of the death penalty gives prosecutors much more flexibility and power to ensure just punishments.它给检察官辩诉交易过程中的另一个讨价还价的筹码,这是至关重要的在拥挤的法院系统降低成本。请求讨价还价的刑事案件数量(即被告承认有罪,以换取一个较小的句子或其他让步)可高达80或90%的病例。时间,成本,和人员需求的一个刑事案件,实在是没有太多的选择。绝大多数人提审实际上是有罪的犯罪指控。即使你认为被告只值得终身监禁,没有死刑的威胁,可能没有办法让他认罪并接受这句话。如果一个案件进入审判,除了巨大的成本外,你跑的机会,你可能会失去,意味着暴力犯罪得到了苏格兰人自由。死刑的存在给检察官更多的灵活性和强大功能,确保惩罚。Yes .金融成本转嫁给纳税人的死刑是几次,把他关在监狱里的生活。 1. Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life. Most people dont realize that carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his life. How can this be? It has to do with the endless appeals, additional required procedures, and legal wrangling that drag the process out. Its not unusual for a prisoner to be on death row for 15-20 years. Judges, attorneys, court reporters, clerks, and court