The United States should retain the use of the death penalty

With the lack of anything to rebut, I will use this to extend my arguments a bit. The character limit cut me short in the previous round.First off, I want everyone to know that I do not think that prison is a very nice and pleasant place to be. I know that a life in prison is hardly ideal for anyone. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the perks we provide to inmates can sometimes be viewed as extreme.Every prison has a library. Every prison library contains a large volume of legal texts. A prisoner sentenced to life has all of the time needed to go through the legal books and find a loophole to get out of his "life without parole" sentence. If you view the articles posted in the previous round, it is clear that many murderers have been released after being sentenced to life without parole.On The Risk Of Killing An Innocent ManMy opponent has pointed out that, in the past, people that were innocent were sentenced to death. I cannot deny this. However, it is well-known that our advancements in technology, DNA testing, and any other type of chemical or biological analysis are getting better each day. Basically, our ability to correctly identify the true murderer and our ability to prove innocence are now very good.When it comes to the "cold" cases, evidence is always difficult to find. Yet our advancements are now so refined that we are even increasing our ability to prove innocence on these cold cases. The website my opponent posted shows that the cold cases where innocence was proved jumped from 3.1 per year to 5 per year. That is a 66% increase! It can only get better from there.And if our technology and advancements can make such strides with cold cases, we can certainly perform similar feats on new cases. In fact, when it comes to a new case, when the evidence is still fresh, we can now assess with extremely high accuracy whether a person is innocent or guilty.Furthermore, the death penalty is not simply handed out on every murder case. It is given when there is an overwhelming amount of evidence. Our standards of what constitutes overwhelming evidence has changed drastically over the years. Someone convicted of murder nowadays with overwhelming evidence is almost certainly the true murderer. So the risk of killing an innocent man through the death penalty is now so low that it is a non-issue.But then we come to escapes from prison and legal loopholes. Murderers escaping from prison are extremely rare, but it still happens. When it does, there is obviously a good chance that this person will kill again. It is in their nature. When it comes to legal loopholes, however, there is actually a decent chance of a murderer being released. The law books have always had many grey areas. And if you have ever looked at the volume of law books, even for a single section of the law (e.g. the penal code), you would know that the sheer volume makes closing the loopholes impossible. I know first hand from working in the court system that there are far too many grey areas and loopholes in our law books; far too many to ever correct.So the murderers can always find a way around a "life without parole" sentence, while our crime-solving abilities constantly reduce the chance of sentencing an innocent man to death.In the end, life without parole actually contains a higher risk of an innocent person dying. Not by the hands of the state, but by the hands of the murderer that was sentenced. And the discrepancy between the two is sure to grow each day. Our advancements and ability to prove innocence will continue to grow, while the law books and loopholes will continue to be grey.On Devaluing LifeI've already mentioned the libraries. And I will reiterate some of the other perks of prison. The inmates have a gym, cable television, movies, and an outdoor area for recreation. They also have the ability to become certified in a particular trade, or take college courses and earn a college degree. In some prisons (e.g. Monroe, Washington) they have movie nights with popcorn and ice cream and barbeques. Once again, I know that prison, even with all of this, is hardly ideal. But to give all of these things to a murderer is simply absurd. Add to this the fact that some murderers decide to write books while behind bars. Now in addition to these amenities, the murderer has a chance at his or her name becoming immortal. And now you must think about the victims. Innocent people, living decent lives, doing the right thing, and then killed. When the evidence is overwhelming, giving a murder a sentence of life without parole definitely devalues the life of the victims. All of those perks granted to the murderer! This is justice? I hardly think so. The death penalty is not devaluing life. It is the perks of prison that truly devalue life; the life of the victims.On Rehabilitation This notion you have of reforming and rehabilitating murderers is something that, once again, devalues the life of the victims. To waste time trying to reform such terrible people is ludicrous!Our justice system already seems to have an imbalance when it comes to rights of the victim vs. rights of the criminal. Your notion of rehabilitation tips those scales to an extreme.Think of the victims. Think of the victim's family. If your family member was killed by one of those Manson murderers you cited earlier, would you still have the same notion? Would you say "I know my relative was killed by this murderer, but I think the murderer should be reformed and rehabilitated."? Somehow, I don't think so. Would you care if this person that killed your family found religion once they were behind bars? I'm sure that the families of the people killed by Watson and Atkins didn't exactly rejoice upon hearing the news that these murderers are now "Christian Fundamentalists."And when it comes to rehabilitation, what does that involve? Therapy sessions from professionals, rehabilitation programs, activities to help with the rehabilitation, etc. Who is going to pay for all of this? It would have to be the taxpayers. The families of the victims now fall into this category. So in addition to having a family member brutally murdered, the state will now take money out of your paycheck to help the person that killed your family member. GET REAL!! In short, trying to reform or rehabilitate such people is a joke. There is such a thing as taking something to an extreme, and your view of reformation takes liberal viewpoints to that extreme.ConclusionWhen the evidence is overwhelming, the death penalty is the correct course of action. Sentencing a vicious murderer to death is far more just than allowing this terrible excuse for a human being to live in prison with cable tv, a gym, movie night, and all the rest.Our system has given more rights to murderers than to the victims. It is time to correct this horrible injustice.