Capital punishment in Texas is unjust

I will address my opponents rebuttals from round 3, and discuss key voting issus.While this fact may seem interesting, I will explain why Wisconsin has half the murder rate.[1] Wisconsin's Population - 5,686,986[1] Texas's Population - 25.145,561Texas has five times the amount of people, so when you say that Wisconsin has half the murder rate, this logically explains that outcome.I am not sure how this is correct. According to Beaura of Criminal Justice, there has been a decrease in crime after Capital Punishment was increased. While this was said in September 2000, we can see overall it does, in fact, deter crime, and is more "recent" going all the way up to the end of 2000.http://wesleylowe.com.........I'll treat these together with another source.[1]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org......This shows that from 1990 to 2010 murder rates in death penalty states are greater than murder rates in non-death penalty states.This clearly shows that states that use the death penalty has a greater murder rate than those states who do not."""""____________________________________________________________________________________________________While this may seem true, states with the Death Penalty have found that it has caused a deterrance in crime. While states without the death penalty may be lower, Texas is one of the most populated / largest state in the U.S, it's crime rate is extremely high and needs a way to deal with overcrowding issues effectively. My opponent is completely misconstruing my whole contention and avoiding the key argument within that. I will re-quote a passage from my contention two, sub point A:Even though we are calculating a 75% greater cell cost for the DP than for equivalent LWOP cases, equivalent LWOP cases appear to be significantly more expensive, over time, than their DP counterparts. For years, opponents have improperly compared the cost of all LWOP cases to DP cases, when only the DP equivalent LWOP cases are relevant.I don't really understand this refutation.I have already showed how Death penalty expenses are much more than the expenses of Life without parole.While picking the Death Penalty at that time will cost more then life in prison, over time, that price will easily overcome the death penalty. And "Life without parole" isn't common. States like Texas have it, and the Death penalty avoids criminals being released into the streets with the two specific cases I mentioned. My opponent claims that life without parole is much more just than death, but we can't even guarantee that in courts when they do sentence someone to it."If you re-read my sub point B, I specify TWO cases where this is NOT the face. The first one with James Moore, where the family spared his life for life time imprisonment was eligible for parole in a couple of years. What is so "just" about that? If we look at my second example with Kenneth McDuff, we see, again, my opponent is misleading you. Kenneth killed a 16 year old girl, and two boys and was sentenced to life in prison. He was released because of overflowing in the prisons, and then killed again. Prostitute Sarafia Parker, 31, had been beaten, strangled and dumped in a field. He was then again released because of parole."My opponent cites this case;"1. Muneer Deeb Texas Conviction 1985 Released 1993 Deeb was originally sentenced to death for allegedly contracting with three hitmen to kill his ex-girlfriend. The hitmen were also convicted and one was sentenced to death. Deeb consistently claimed no involvement in the crime. Deeb's conviction was overturned by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in 1991 because improper evidence had been admitted at his first trial. With an experienced defense attorney, Deeb was retried and acquitted in 1993."I don't understand how this supports his case. This proves at in fact Texas is just with its capital punishment, and was able to keep an innocent man alive through a fair trial.Because I have addressed all my opponents rebuttals, I will discuss key voting issues in why I have won the debate. While my opponent said the crime rate was lower then States WITH the Death Penalty, the states with Death Penalty have had a positive effect on crime, decreasing it drastically over the years. I support this claim with this source -> http://wesleylowe.com... My opponent tended to drop his values throughout the debate, and focused on all my argument. However, my value was Societal Welfare which is the over all welfare of the society. Through Capital Punishment, societal welfare is improved because of the deterent of crime, and my value criterion of safety is upheld because the moral agents who stray from the rules of society are punished for their crimes. My opponent provides no cases of innocent people wrongfully executed, thus his death of "innocents" argument drops. My opponent says life in prison is just, however I have shown even in the most disgusting and violent crimes, the perpetrator can get free because of our system, and commit the same crimes. There is, in fact, no justice in this. My opponent strayed from the resolution, bringing in stats from other states, however, we were specifically focused on the justice within Capital Punishment in Texas, which I stuck true to. Both my contentions, and subpoints have stood throughout this debate, and because of this, I have shown Capital Punishment to provide fair and just executions, and have shown how (from a cost-benefit anaylsis,) it improves the State overall. Once again, I thank pro for this wonderful debate! I urge you to vote con in this debate. Good luck!