Capital Punishment should be abolished as a form of legal punishment.

I shall begin with some rebuttal. “he did not state why these Human Rights are important. So what? The opposition is basing his argument on the common belief that Human Rights are important. ” I mentioned Human Rights and assumed that the general public would reasonable see Human Rights as something that is significantly important in our modern world. In this case I shall explain. The Declaration of Human Rights was established to state all governments’ and humans’ duty to fulfill the Human Rights of all it’s citizens and those who abode in the country. (1, refer to above sources) The opposing has stated multiple current issues of our modern world, yet failed to state which specific right those have failed to fulfill. I would also like to state that even if certain Human Rights are ignored at some places, that doesn’t mean that there is no purpose to Human Rights. Human Rights cannot be ignored simply due to the fact that it is being ignored elsewhere. “he did not take into account that a just state regularly abrogates people's rights when they intrude upon the rights of others” May I refer you to Article 29, Part 2. This part of the Universal Declaration specifically states that “In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. ” One’s human rights aren’t abrogated due to the fact that they have intruded upon the rights of others, they are sometimes limited by the law (see above). This means that people are not only sent to prison as a form of punishment, but are sent there for a specific amount of time to isolate them from the society, thus protecting the society from those convicts. The opposing has stated that by sending people to prison, their rights to movement, association, and property rights have been denied or taken away from the person. True, one’s free movement between nations and movement in general might be restricted, but that is only to secure the welfare and public order for others. If the government had released convicts and criminals onto the street due to their free movement rights, it would mean that they are violating the right to security of even more people (stated in Article 3). One’s right to association only applies to “peaceful assembly[s] and association[s]” (Article 20). By somebody who is potentially dangerous joining such associations, it is safe to assume that the risk of the association or assembly becoming hostile is significantly increased, thus once again disagreeing with the Human Right. The fact that one’s freedom to property has been voided is not valid. One’s physical property and monetary property might be possibly seized due to say, unpaid bills, but those will not be arbitrarily seized by the government (Article 17). Thus the point that the opposing has made on convict’s rights being abrogated is utterly unreasonable and invalid. (1) One aim of abolishing Capital Punishment is so that less rights will have to be bent or broken to achieve the same result of security in society. “His arguments are arguments for punishments in general, and are not directly specific to Capital Punishment. ” Capital Punishment is the cruelest form of certain unorthodox methods of punishment worldwide. I’m sure my arguments in no way are directed to certain forms of punishment, such as prison sentences. May I remind the opposing that this debate is solely concerning Capital Punishment and that all arguments, although they could be used to argue for abolishment of certain uncommon forms of punishment, are used to argue against Capital Punishment. “I'd also like to point out that the opposition made a bold statement, "Capital punishment is a highly degrading and cruel form of punishment, and can sometimes lead to torture. " It would help if there was some logical reasoning. ” There have been several cases of so called botched executions in the United States. OnJuly 23, 2014, Joseph R. Wood in Arizona was being subject to lethal injection. After the various chemicals were injected that are supposed to make death painless, Wood reportedly gasped for 100 minutes before death was finally announced, one that witnessed the ordeal said that they had counted as much as 640 gasps before Wood was officially announced dead. Efforts to halt the botched execution went unnoticed. Another similar example was on April 29 in 2014 when Clayton D. Lockett was given lethal injection. The remaining 2 drugs that are supposed to be administered after the experimental anesthesia was administered were apparently administered too early causing Lockett to experience pain during the injection. He later died of a heart attack being still in the execution chamber after the execution was halted. Similar cases of the above examples have also occurred. Capital Punishment can possibly be painful, thus should be abolished. (8) “it is to deter the amount of crimes and murders” Firstly, the amount of crimes and murders cannot be detered, crime can though. The fact that humans fear death is only based on personal opinion. If humans did indeed fear death, then there won’t longer be any suicides or suicide attempt. Some humans don’t fear death, and that is the exact reasons they commit those crimes without any fear of the punishments involved. Also to rebut the opposing’s point that the death penalty deters crime, it has been no way proved that it does work, there only “seems to be an obvious negative correlation” in the data. Polls have also shown that police view Capital Punishment as “the least effective” deterrent to crime. I have presented data (9) that stands for my argument below. The data below shows the amount of murder (calculated per 1000 people) of various states that have since abolished the use of capital punishment. The line indicates the year when capital punishment was given up. From the graphs shown above, it is reasonable to assume that the ending of Capital Punishment in the various states have had a positive effect on the murder rates of those states, thus we can come to the conclusion that ending Capital Punishment is in fact beneficial to the society and that ending this form of punishment is highly beneficial. “Capital Punishment is the best answer to murder” The opposing has said that I have not stated other alternatives to Capital Punishment, yet one very obvious alternative would be life without parole, which is the highest possibly sentence that can be given out. This sentence will also prevent occurrences of those who have been sentenced to life to go back out and kill additional people. How would one be released if they are sentenced to a life sentence in the first place? You also state that the only way to counter murder is to take the lives of those who did do those. The opposing has also stated that the only way to counter a murder is to take the life from the murderer too, then shouldn’t all murder, including manslaughter be charged with the same punishment? Murder does not solve murder. ~ I’d now like to state some additional arguments. Capital Punishment is expensive Let us take Washington State as an example. Reports have shown that the capital punishment results in costs ranging around $1 million more than if capital punishment were not sought. These cover the costs of the execution itself, and legal factors. This is even more exaggerated in other states such as Colorado, where the death penalty costs around $3.5 million compared to $150 for a life without parole. Be reminded that these occur multiple times a year in multiple states, often ranging up to even a billion dollars a year. (10) Through the lengthy appeal process, this money is often waived and comes from taxpayer money. Instead, if this same money were to be invested into education, hundreds of thousands of students will be able to have access to school supplies. Why are we wasting money on the death penalty? Capital Punishment brings shame to a country The most recent poll has shown that the majority of people in the United States support life without parole over capital punishment (11). If the people don’t support it, then why does the government support it. Using Capital Punishment brings shame to a country as people will see those governments and countries as cruel and bad by killing its inmates and convicted. This in turn, will bring a slight fluctuation of negativity to the country’s economy and tourism as those tourists dislike the negativity of a certain country. This is even more significant in democratic nations, such as the United States. The Constitution, the basis of law in the United States, begins with the phrase “We the People, of the United States” (12). The United States government killing these convicts is equivalent to the people of the United States killing these people, and that isn’t what the people want. Capital Punishment humiliates whatever country that incorporates it, also bringing shame to its citizens. In conclusion, I have rebutted some inconsistencies and invalid points that my opponent has made, in addition, I have made some new and additional points. This motion shall stand. Thank you. (8): . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... (9): . http://www.disastercenter.com..., . http://www.disastercenter.com..., . http://www.disastercenter.com... (10): . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... (11): . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... (12): . http://www.archives.gov...