Capital punishment supporters won the first speech forum of the spring semester in the Cotillion Ballroom Tuesday night with a vote of 143-91. Opposing sides sat facing each other as Aaron O’Neil, associate professor of mass communication, opened the forum and then handed it over to moderator Rachelle Hitt, mass communication senior from Gheens.

The topic of the forum was “Resolved, that the states should ban capital punishment.”

Amanda Coyne, biology senior from Houma, spoke in favor of the ban, and Jennifer Dehart, freshman from Houma, spoke for the con side.

Coyne started her speech by quoting Mary Robinson, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, “The increasing use of the death penalty in the United States is a matter of serious concern and runs counter to the international community’s desire for the abolition of the death penalty.”

She continued by expressing her three main reasons why the death penalty should be banned. “First, our government is not a government of vengeance and therefore should not have the power of life and death over its citizens,” Coyne said.

“Second, the death penalty has not proven to be a deterrent to the committing of crimes worthy of the sentence. Third, many convicted to death are often falsely convicted, wrongfully tried, thus, wrongfully executed.”

“As a member of the United Nations and the so-called leader of the free world, we are responsible for setting examples of diplomacy and fair treatment of all people to the world,” Coyne said, going on to compare United State’s execution of minors with the actions of Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

She explained her final point, that the death penalty system is faulty, by saying that one in 600 inmates on death row are acquitted.

Coyne concluded by asking, “What if it were you who was falsely accused of first degree murder? Would you want to be killed to protect a unconstitutional and often faulty system?”

Dehart began her speech with the story of a Brooklyn man, who after being accused of murder said, “Yeah I shot her, and I knew I would not go to the chair.”

Dehart then stated main points by saying, “I am for capital punishment because it is constitutional, cost efficient and the Bible strongly recommends it.”

Dehart supported her points quoting Henry Lafont, associate professor for criminal justice at Nicholls, who says that there is no automatic death penalty; it is a two-step process. She also said that if the founding fathers had known about the recent rise in violent crime, they would have included capital punishment in the preamble.

Dehart went on to explain that the capital punishment is more cost efficient, “No amount of money can account for a human life, but with the rate of inflation we have to consider all of the aspects.” She then presented figures from Time Magazine that supported her argument.

Dehart then quoted Old Testament scripture from the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus that she said was proof that the Bible supported capital punishment.

Dehart concluded by saying, “It is time to step up and show these criminals who is boss. There is only one cure for this type of sickness, and that is death.”

After both speakers finished, the floor was opened to audience members who were given three minutes each to express opinions. Opinions ranged greatly, and some speakers were booed, hissed and cheered by the divided crowd.