Death Penalty

I thank Con for instigating this debate, and giving me the opportunity to debate on a subject that I am currently undecided on. ====CONTENTIONS==== "Recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year... The study examined the relationship between the number of executions and the number of murders in the U.S. for the 26-year period from 1979 to 2004, using data from publicly available FBI sources... There seems to be an obvious negative correlation in that when executions increase, murders decrease, and when executions decrease, murders increase..." -Michael Summers. As shown here, saving the life of a major criminal (namely a murderer) on death row has a net negative force on society, and, overall, is not beneficial to anyone. It is a self-defeating argument for death penalty protesters to say they are saving the life of a criminal, when, in actuality, sparing them will only result in nearly a hundred deaths annually. Simply put, saving their life is only encouraging murder. It's like saying, 'Hey, you killed multiple people, and irrefutable data shows that sparing you will kill 74 innocent people for every year you live. Let's spare you anyway." This is defeating the point and will only result in *MANY* many more deaths. "In the early 1980s, the return of the death penalty was associated with a drop in the number of murders. In the mid-to-late 1980s, when the number of executions stabilized at about 20 per year, the number of murders increased. Throughout the 1990s, our society increased the number of executions, and the number of murders plummeted. Since 2001, there has been a decline in executions and an increase in murders." -Michael Summers. This here only strengthens and crystallizes the contention above. To support my opponent's standpoint is asinine as it will lead to more deaths as shown above. Any assertions regarding a faulty study or coincidence from my opponent is refuted below. "It is possible that this correlated relationship could be mere coincidence, so we did a regression analysis on the 26-year relationship. The association was significant at the .00005 level, which meant the odds against the pattern being simply a random happening are about 18,000 to one. Further analysis revealed that each execution seems to be associated with 71 fewer murders in the year the execution took place..." -Michael Summers. My argument above is only made stronger by this statement. Seventy-one lives are saved when there is an increase in executions. Any argument my opponent may attempt to "save the life of the bad guy" is beyond refuted. "We know that, for whatever reason, there is a simple but dramatic relationship between the number of executions carried out and a corresponding reduction in the number of murders..." -Michael Summers, PhD, MBA. ====REBUTTALS==== I'll respond to my opponent's case sentence-by-sentence. "The death penalty should not be considered an option when issuing sentences to a criminal. No matter what their crime may be (murder, rape, etc..) no one deserves to die, and more importantly no one has the right to take a life away from someone else. By issuing the death penalty, you are contradicting the claim that murder is wrong. But in all actuality, you are murdering the person that committed the crime. Punishing violence with violence does not solve anything. It is extremely hypocritical. Plus, jail time can either serve as the worst punishment of all, forcing the criminal to sit and ponder over what he/she has done, or it can serve as a time of repentance and change the person as a whole. If you are for the death penalty, please inform me on your reasoning and beliefs. I would really like to see the other side of the argument." -Con. Firstly, it SHOULD be considered as evidenced from my solid argumentation above. You're right on one thing, no one should die *unless* MORE people are killed because we spared a felon's life, we need to save as many lives as possible. By being for the deaths if many to save one, YOU are the one contradicting that murder is wrong. We SHOULD be eliminating the cause(s) of many (look above) deaths per year to save as many lives as possible. If punishing violently is what will help maintain peace and order in a chaotic society, then it is worth it. Jail time is: I. Crueler and more inhumane (contradicting my opponent's ideals of morals. If murdering is immoral, then how is psychological torture not?) II. Will give them time to harm other inmates and/or guards. III. Will give them a convenient timeframe to escape and kill more people. As a last note in my rebuttals, if someone has repeatedly murder, they will NOT change. ====CONCLUSION==== I have completely refuted my opponent's case, and have provided more-than-reliable evidence that opposing the death penalty is self-defeating as it contradicts the cause if terminating it (it adds additional deaths). As such, there are not moral or lawful reasons to be against the death penalty. In conclusion, I have more than fulfilled my obligations so far in this debate. I look forward to my opponent's responses. Good luck, Con. ====SOURCES==== http://www.wsj.com...