The Death penalty should be abolished.

OPENING STATEMENT: Ecclesiastes 3 tells us that there is a time and place for everything under the sun. Granted, not everything is pleasant, least of all taking the life of another human being. The term "everything", being all inclusive, implies that there must be a time and place for the death penalty. When a convicted felon is sentenced and put to death, unpleasant as it may seem, society is guaranteed that this criminal will never commit crime again. VP: Utilitarianism defined as the greatest good for the greatest number of people. VC: Cost Benefit Analysis. The NEG will demonstrate that not only does the death penalty have a place in our criminal justice system, but that it also makes fiscal sense. CONTENTION 1: Deterrence Statistics indicate that for every murderer executed, seven lives were spared. Seven to one is actually a pretty good number. That represents the potential for 7X the earning power, 7X the spending power, and 7X the effectiveness of our GDP. With more people at work, enjoying life, and being productive it clearly serves the overall greater good. CONTENTION 2: Economics In 2005, the average cost of housing a prisoner was over $38,000 per year. Multiply that figure times the number of inmates and it clearly astounding. This is paid for by our tax dollars. There is little contribution back to society from housed inmates, financial notwithstanding. It is costing us millions of dollars every year to house criminals that, not only do we have no intention of ever releasing, but also will never put anything back into the GDP. "Many opponents present, as fact, that the cost of the death penalty is so expensive (at least $2 million per case? ), that we must choose life without parole ('LWOP') at a cost of $1 million for 50 years. Predictably, these pronouncements may be entirely false. JFA [Justice for All] estimates that LWOP cases will cost $1.2 million-$3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases. There is no question that the up front costs of the death penalty are significantly higher than for equivalent LWOP cases. There also appears to be no question that, over time, equivalent LWOP cases are much more expensive. .. than death penalty cases. Opponents ludicrously claim that the death penalty costs, over time, 3-10 times more than LWOP. " Dudley Sharp; Director of Death Penalty Resources at Justice for All "Death Penalty and Sentencing Information," Justice for All website Oct. 1, 1997 I will now move on to my opponent's case. Point 1: "Doesnt our constitution state that each citizen has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Basically, the death penalty does not follow the constitution. " Yes, our Constitution does indeed state that every citizen has these rights. However, every person is also obligated to follow the law. When the law is broken, there must be a consequence. People who choose to break the law, are simultaneously choosing to surrender their individual freedoms. Further, using my opponent's same argument, don't people who obey the law deserve to keep their freedom? If the answer is yes, then the death penalty is Constitutional. Point 2: "Also, if its some big time serial killer, then wouldn't we want them to suffer? Killing them kinda gives them a free card. If we let them go to prison, then they will suffer. " 2A: Should we condone the suffering of a human being who has committed a crime? This leads me to ask a couple of questions. What is the purpose of prison? Is it meant to punish or to rehab? Will an individual suffer in prison? What is the definition of suffering to each individual? 2B: If someone dreads prison more than death, I suppose executing them may be giving them the lesser of two evils. 2C: Some people do not dread going to prison. There are those who feel more at home in prison than being free. While prison is not a vacation resort, prisoners do have access to television, recreation, climate controlled housing, meals, education, and visitation. What do their victims get? What do their victims families get? "Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder. .. People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death. .. life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death. .. Therefore, a life sentence must be less deterrent than a death sentence. And we must execute murderers as long as it is merely possible that their execution protects citizens from future murder. " Ernest Van Den Haag, PhD Late Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University "For the Death Penalty" CONCLUSION: Thus far, as the AFF, my opponent has not offered any information that actually affirms the resolution. I have demonstrated that when convicted felons are executed, it not only saves millions in tax dollars that would be used to house the felon fo rlife, but also it would save the lives of other human beings who could contribute to society. Thus, it is cost effective, and serves the greater good. For these reasons I respectfully request a negative ballot. Thanks