Death penalty is bad

Judges, ladies, gentlemen, hello, my name is Forever 23 and I am here to bring forth the premise that death penalty has more benefits than harms. So let me start with my opponents arguments. In her Round 3, she plagiarized the beginning of her speech from: . http://www.amnestyusa.org... In her fourth speech, she plagiarized from . http://www.listland.com... And now onto the refutations of the NEW points the brought up. So her first point was that it is immoral and hypocritical. This hypocritical strategy however, is the only way to make sure that rape and murder is prevented. If we don't implement this strategy, what will stop an insane mind from setting off a bomb on the middle of the road. Or raping a little 8 year old girl. You know the answer. Nothing. So while the moral aspect of this is very. .. sentimental, we must also consider saving lives of possible future victims. Her second assertion was that it was immoral. But is murder of children moral? Is rape moral? Is stealing money from the homeless moral? NO, it is not and these criminals deserve to receive a fitting punishment. They knew that killing is immoral. They knew how much rape harms the child. They knew that stealing will result in a punishment! If your family or friends (god forbid) died in a bomb attack, would you want the criminal dead? Would you? It would give you closure. While nothing could make up for the deaths, the criminal should pay with his life. Her third assertion was that there is no evidence of the death penalty reducing crime rates. . http://www.washingtonpost.com...; A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. " Statistical studies like his are among a dozen papers since 2001 that capital punishment has deterrent effects. They all explore the same basic theory _ if the cost of something (be it the purchase of an apple or the act of killing someone) becomes too high, people will change their behavior (forego apples or shy from murder). To explore the question, they look at executions and homicides, by year and by state or county, trying to tease out the impact of the death penalty on homicides by accounting for other factors, such as unemployment data and per capita income, the probabilities of arrest and conviction, and more. " Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14). Her fourth assertion is that it does not give criminals the chance to rehabilitate. However, rehabilitation will not help criminals and felons. These are insane minded people. They have committed unforgivable crimes. The reason that criminals are put to death is because the jury, judges and public understand that no matter what hospital they are put in, after they are released, they will commit crimes, take more lives and harm more people. Her fifth and final assertion was that there can be false convictions. But as I mentioned before, WHAT KIND OF SYSTEM IS WITHOUT FLAWS? NONE! In order to stop wrong convictions, we must edit the investigation system. We must help the law system. Just because of car accidents, you do not see a ban on cars! People try to add new technology to cars, not ban them. So lets just FIX THE INVESTIGATIONS SYSTEM! Now allow me to restate my own assertions. 1. The people on death row committed terrible crimes. Judges, those crime include, MURDER, KIDNAPPING, RAPE AND BOMBING AIRCRAFTS. All of these result in the death of millions and the pain the families of those victims have to endure. Lets compare this with the immorality assertion. All the crimes I have listed are very immoral. Death penalty, is as close as we can get, which is very far to trying to make up for those crimes. The criminals did not use a rule book on what they could or could not do to people. Well, the USFG must punish the criminals for their actions. 2. People should get what they deserve! Do you really think that criminals did not expect punishments for their actions. Of course they knew what to expect. And if they don't give that, it will pass the message that no punishment will be given for murder. However, we MUST give people what they deserve. Let me give a very simple analogy. Lets compare it to the Wicked Witch of the West from the Wizard of Oz. She has really hurt the land and was therefore melted by Dorothy. The with got what she deserved. Dorothy, who was very kind throughout the story, got to go back home to Kansas. She was praised for her wonderful actions. 3. The death penalty guarantees safety. My opponent presented that there are no statistics that the death penalty does not prevent murder. However there ARE numerous amount of statics that prove how the death penalty helped prevent murder. I have spoken more about them in my refutation. . http://listverse.com.... "Nevertheless, if would-be criminals know undoubtedly that they will be put to death should they murder with premeditation, very many of them are much less inclined to commit murder. Whether or not would-be criminals are wary of committing the worst crime is an important"and probably impossible"question to answer. Murder still happens very frequently. So some criminals disregard this warning for various reasons. But the fact does remain that many criminals who ride the fence on committing murder ultimately decide to spare the victim"s life. In a larger sense, capital punishment is the ultimate warning against all crimes. If the criminal knows that the justice system will not stop at putting him to death, then the system appears more draconian to him. Hence, he is less inclined to break and enter. He may have no intention of killing anyone in the process of robbing them, but is much more apprehensive about the possibility if he knows he will be executed. Thus, there is a better chance that he will not break and enter in the first place. " 4. The penalty helps ensure JUSTICE! This is showing that it is not TOLERABLE to murder! The death penalty is giving the criminal justice and at least attempting to provide closure for victims families. The United States promises liberty and justice for ALL. That's means that criminals should get what they deserve, which is being put to death. Now I just want to compare the 2 most important points of this debate. My opponents most important point was that it is immoral. My most valuable point was that it ensures JUSTICE for all. As I mentioned before, the penalty is completely moral. It ensures that criminals get what they deserve The death penalty helps lower the crime level because it proves to the insane minds that doing a crime will get then NOWHERE. Allows me to repeat, . http://www.washingtonpost.com...; A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides! !! Judge I am a pro-lifer and that is WHY I am arguing to keep the death penalty. It keep us SAFE! With the death penalty, you will not have to be worried every single time you come home from work. You will know that because there is the death penalty, which deters crime, you will be so much more SAFER. And before I conclude this debate, I would just like to show that my opponent dropped EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY ARGUMENTS.