The death penalty should NOT be allowed

Rebutalls R1: ErrorInmates who have been placed in death row, are simply waiting for their execution, and have a chance to be released if they are innocent. LWP which contains the words "without parole" are not going to be looked at, if you by chance the criminal is innocent, hence is why there is no parole. Atleast with the DP, innocents have a chance to prove themselves, and 67% of the time, Death rows inmates have been released. So, which sentence seems more fair? LWOP sentences receive no special consideration on appeal, which limits the possibility they will be reduced or reversed. A person sentenced to die in prison receives only one automatic appeal, not several, and is not provided any court-appointed attorneys after this appeal is complete, usually within two years of the initial sentence.Regarding the amount of wrongful executions, Pro must prove that those wrongful executions , outweigh the number of innocent lived from these executions. Let me address the wrongful executions. In this case, it actually does make sense that the DP has a high rate of exonerations, because it means that those who have been wrongfully been convicted, can be free. LWP victims are literally stuck in jail until they die. Lets do some quick math, , I show what that % looks like. 6/1,412= 0.004% of prisoners have been wrongfully executed, Since, the DP has saved numerous amount of lives (referring to the 28% I mentioned earlier) I see no reason to abolish it. With newer technology, DNA testing, and a panel of juries, the error rate will only lower, and clearly the # of lives saved outweighs the 0.004% of wrongful executions. R2: Racial discriminationThere isn't any correlation that Pro has shown that these racial discriminations directly correlate to the DP. No evidence has been provided that indicates the DP lawyers tend to be poor. R3: PublicityPublicity is not the fault of the DP. If anything you should be blaming the media. Most of the time, those DP convicts are on T.V, because they committed some terrible crime. It isn't the DP, that causes all this media coverage, unless Pro is willing to give proof. R4: DoctorsThese doctors are specifically there to do their job. Nobody is forcing them to take part in a DP case. If doctors do not want to take part, they have every right to step away. We should let doctors make the choice. R5: HypocrisyI fail to see any hypocrisy in the DP. You are simply killing somebody who killed someone else. He stole the right to live of somebody else, so what moral right does he have to live? The comparison Pro made doesn't make sense. In that case, we should never kill anybody, even when we go to war, because we are killing people for killing others. I can imagine what would have happened if we didn't kill Nazis.R6: Government ControlPro makes a good case here. I personally believe in minimal governmental control, but the judicial process criminals go through are more fair than what LWP cases go through.LWP which contains the words "without parole" are not going to be looked at, if by chance the criminal is innocent, hence is why there is no parole. Atleast with the DP, innocents have a chance to prove themselves, and 67% of the time, Death rows inmates have been released. So, which sentence seems more fair? LWOP sentences receive no special consideration on appeal, which limits the possibility they will be reduced or reversed. A person sentenced to die in prison receives only one automatic appeal, not several, and is not provided any court-appointed attorneys after this appeal is complete, usually within two years of the initial sentence.R7: Religious reasonsIn the United States, the Church and State are seperate. Pro cannot bring Bibical morals into the debate, as the law of the United States is secular from the Bible.R8: LWPI mentioned earlier why LWP cases, don't always do justice. There is no way to tell whether LWP victims are innocent, because cases aren't taken as seriously, and do not go through many trials as DP cases are. Like I mentioned in my first round, most criminals think rationally like regular people, so fear as a factor still plays a role. R9: CostAccording to the studies provided by Con, he demostrates that most DP cases cost more than LWP cases. However, these stats provided do not take in factor of Plea Bargaining. What exactly is Plea bargaining? It is an arrangement between a prosecutor and a defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge in the expectation of leniency. Most often that not, plea bargaining is used to to avoid the cost of the DP by substancial amounts, and will result in a cheaper case. The costs for LWP are usually over exxgarated, as the amount of time a prisoner serves and what type of prison it essentially is playing into factor. These costs provided by Con which are $44, 563, do not represent the costs of all DP cases across the country. Also, these estimates, do not take Plea Barganing into factor. Con makes a mistake here. He mentions., "44,563*50 = 2,228,150. So this is 2.2 million" So basically, this is the cost of keeping a prisoner in jail, "after" he has been sentenced. If you take the cost of the LWP case in the first place, you would see that the cost is actually 2.2million+ 2.01 million (cost of the LWP case) So, using the statistics provided by Con, you can see the costs are actually higher, when we take the costs of the LWP case, and the actual cost of keeping the criminal in jail itself. Then again, it isn't an accurate measure this, because rates vary across states. Some states might be more expensive than others, and like I mentioned again, this study doesn't support Plea Bargaining like I mentioned.Also, the cost of the DP varies among the juristrictions of different states. In some cases, it has been shown that the cost of the DP was pretty much the same as the LWP case. This trend was discovered by Sorenson and Rocky Leann Pilgrim published evidence that found that the cost of an LWOP case in Texas and a DP were the same. Another factor that must be taken into factor is the dettering factor. According to Mr.Lott, who wrote a book on the effects of the DP, he estimated, that after calculating all other variables, the DP actually prevented 12% to 14% of crime that could have occured in the 90's, when the crime rate was quite high. In this case, the DP actually prevented murders from occuring in the first place. If you go back to my first source from Ms. Shepard, she figured that one execution was roughly equalivlent to preventing a total of 3 murders. And finally, Pro says "Why do we have to pay money out of our TAX PAYER MONEY to kill people? Why do we have to pay for criminals we have nothing to do with?" Why should we pay to keep rapists, serial killers etc... alive, when they receive clothes, 3 square meals a day? They literally are provided with all nesccities required to live. 10: Mentally ill peoplePro is quite right. Executing mentally ill people is un-constitutional, and shouldn't be allowed. However, this isn't a good enough reason to ban the DP all together. Simple ammendments can be made to fix this.I'll provide sources in comments Over to you Sara.