Repealing the 8th amendment

[Deleted]

Hey everyone.
For our debate class, we've been given quite an assingment......we have to argue to repeal an assigned amendment.....I have to talk about repealing the the whole cruel unusual punishment thing..... (I'm just glad I didn't have to argue repealing the first amendment).

I'm going to argue that certain torture methods (whipping or bamboo under the fingernails or something) can be used as an addition or perhaps alternative (I'm leaning more towards addition) to the Death penalty....after due process of course.

It would only be used for punishment after guilt has been proved (not to extract information from suspects, enemies to the U.S.....ect.).

Only for murderers......or using texas's laws for giving the Death Penalty.

I would argue that it would give criminals more to fear.

That it would be more of a proper punishment (eye for an eye, I guess?).

And I'll mention that Tyland (I think that's the country) allows torture, and is very peaceful.

I know I'm missing a lot, and my argument is still too....unstable? So I would appreciate anything you guys can say that can help.

thanks!

[Donnie]

rubyiv said:

Hey everyone.
For our debate class, we've been given quite an assingment......we have to argue to repeal an assigned amendment.....I have to talk about repealing the the whole cruel unusual punishment thing.

According to the judges who are biased against the DP, our entire culture has "evolved" to the point that our national culture now views even the most pleasant application of the DP as cruel and unusual. That being the case, there is no longer any need for the amendment. That is bcause, according to the most elightened judicial opinion, nobody on a jury would ever impose a cruel and unusual punishment. Also, since legislators are so much nicer than the rest of us, no legislative body would ever pass a law that would enable such punsishment. Even if they did, any governor would veto it. On top of that, most state cConstitutions already cover the same protection. So if liberals are correct in their assertions, the Amendment is not needed.

[Ariel]

Dear Ruby,

I understand that this is a class exercise but I am wondering how serious you are about this. I fully appreciate that it is an academic procedure but as someone who used to take part in a lot of debates at university I know how important it is to present your case carefully.

Is this still a current assignment? If so, I would be willing to offer some lines of argument that you could explore. If not, well, I like chatting and I'm always happy to help out if I can.

Regards

Linda

[iamjumbo]

is the pain, real or imagined, of an individual as important as the lives of thousands, or millions?