The death penalty Deters crime and saves lives

Lets get something straight first I believe that one innocent life lost is one too may. Both of my cases which you brought up in rebuttal had issues within the trial that are still relevant today like the police and law being uncooperative with Mahmoood Mattan's wife being ignored as they tried to avoid the scandal that comes with killing the wrong person and the subjective nature of a jury. And you still have not clarified your point like I asked. What you seem to be saying is that while Britain may make mistakes American will not so I will go on to look at some more of America's mistakes on top of the Alan Gell case in my last argument in my substantive. Your rebuttal for the "rest of my case" I find quite insulting because you have refused to address them properly. Your first statement about how people get angry and don't kill would be fine had I not made it clear to you that I am discussing the occasions where murder is committed and the lack of thought about consequences in this case therefore making your rebuttal irrelevant. Your next point of rebuttal is also made irrelevant as you have failed to directly engage with the point that I was making which I will clarify for you again. If the murder is plotted then the killer thinks they have done enough to outsmart the police and not get caught i.e. they are not worried about the consequences for when they do get caught because they don't think it is going to happen. I am going to make my third cases very clear. I am talking about how mentally ill criminals cannot be deterred from murdering someone if that is what their illness leads them to do making your rebuttal once again irrelevant. Please take the time to read the points that I am making and if I do not make myself clear ask for clarification it is better for the debate. Rebuttal for your arguments. On your first point I would love to know how this information was collected. Was an interview done on all of those on death row asking how many more people would you have killed of you were not about to be killed yourself? No? It seems to me that information of this sort is controversial and not strong enough to base a point on. You say that it acts as a deterrence but 88% of experts would disagree with you as shown below. "According to a survey of the former and present presidents of the country's top academic criminological societies, 88% of these experts rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. (Radelet & Lacock, 2009) Consistent with previous years, the 2010 FBI Uniform Crime Report showed that the South had the highest murder rate. The South accounts for over 80% of executions. The Northeast, which has less than 1% of all executions, tied with the West for the lowest murder rate." [1] So even in states where the execution rate is high where according to your statement the deterrence should be at it's greatest we see the most murders. I will discuss this more in my substantive. Your next point seems to suggest something strange. The state (according to you) has the right to have the power to be judge, jury and executioner even if ten innocent people are killed in an attempt to save more innocent (or not so innocent) people that could possibly have been killed based on statistics that I find are a bit too controversial. On that point I would like to ask you a question. Why do these potential victims have more of a right to life than people that have been wrongly convicted and killed by the state that is meant to keep them from harm? On to my substantive where I will add to my case by looking at examples of miscarriages of justice and I will look at the death penalty in Texas. Lets look at a very recent case that took place in America (so no bad British policing). "Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelley, known as the West Memphis 3, spent 18 years in prison for the murders of three 8-year-old boys in 1993. Baldwin and Misskelley were sentenced to life imprisonment and Echols was sentenced to death. The controversy of the case, ranging from police and jury misconduct to coerced confessions and fabricated evidence, raised doubt in their guilt. The case attracted the support of several celebrities and even the parents of two of the victims have come to believe in their innocence. In 2007, DNA excluded them from the crime, but the state refused to exonerate them. In 2011, a new judge ordered an evidentiary hearing to be held on December 5th 2011. In 2011, the prosecutors and the defense talked and an agreement was reached for the WM3 to enter Alford pleas in exchange for time served, an offer they reluctantly accepted, because they would have been acquitted in a new trial and the state would have faced a lawsuit. They vowed to fight the convictions and find the real killer to clear their names. Prosecutors and police maintain they are guilty." [2] Appears to be that the same problems I pointed out in my previous cases are still apparent in America today. This may be because no matter what country you are in people are still human and there are enough links between British law and American law to make comparisons effective. Texas has the highest capital punishment rate in America but from 1960 until 2010 the number of murders increased from 824 to 1,249 with a peak of 2,652 in 1991.[3] The death penalty was inplace throughout and it doesn't appear to have had much difference because as a deterrent it doesn't work. Over the past decade or so there has been a fall in the number of violent crimes committed but I believe that this has more to do with reduced stigma against minorities better education systems and improvements in the way police deal with situates like gangs. The death penalty has been there constantly and the number of murders and violent crimes has fluctuated quite dramatically in some years which leads me to assume that it other factors are coming into play and they have far more influence over the matter. To sum up there are more factors at play in relation to murder and violent crimes than the death penalty and some of these hold more influence and because miscarriages of just still happen it is not good enough simply to say well ten innocents might die but we are supposedly saving all these other people. Life should be granted more respect than that.