Débat contre la peine de mort

Alexis doit avant presenter le débat

1. Unnecessary 1min/2min

Who are we to decide the right to life or death on a human? There is no evidence in the scientific literature that the death penalty is really the deterrent effect it is given. In France, for example, the number of murders has decreased since the abolition of the death penalty. To prevent crime, it is important to have a justice system that works fairly. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes everyone’s right to life. The death penalty is a violation of human rights.

Killing is never justified, even when we follow the orders of a state. A state cannot at the same time prohibit killing while he is using the death penalty. Let’s be rational Alexis! The cause of abolition is not a question of culture, it is a question of principle. I would like to conclude with a quote of Albert Camus: “Neither in the hearts of peoples, neither in the ways of society, there will be lasting peace until death penalty is outlawed”. That’s it. 

1. Inhumane 1min

So, you say, the death penalty is for the victim! Well I disagree because, many families who have lost loved ones say that, the death penalty does not help them to get better. In fact there is no “human” death penalty, so it is not necessary for the families. Whatever execution pursues (poursuit) just one direction: to suppress a life. Who are we to decide the right to life or death on a human?

So, I don’t understand your demonstration with this pen Alexis, but what I remember is offering to kill people to reduce crime! I think it’s a good demonstration of this system because, the death penalty is used by the politicians to convince the peoples that they are fighting crime, In fact is a solution to not pass for killers.  But, if a member of your family were present in France instead of Hamida Djandoubi in the prison of the Baumettes of Marseilles, on 1977 during the execution, how would you have reacted? Most of the reactions would have been to call for the death penalty to be stopped because they would have considered it to be something inhumane.

1. Unfair 1min

If we listen to Alexis, it’s hard to answer a real argument, because I’m now a sadistic person. So I really want to consider this debate important to me. The death penalty was disproportionately used against poor or minority people. In France, the majority of peoples sentenced to death was black. With the death penalty, states satisfy some form of power and some form of revenge.

So being against the death penalty does not mean reducing the importance of a crime No, it’s consider that the death penalty is inhumane. Who are you Alexis, to decide the right to life or death on a human? Mistake of justice and erroneous judgments can never be totally excluded. When a death penalty is executed, there is no going back.

...