Capital Punishment.

DATA IS SUBJECTIVEFirst of all, I would like to clear the fact that I am not confusing any of the arguments, you merely refuted my own arguments because they contradict your own. You accuse me of not provide sufficient data, neither did? You did not provide any statistics elaborating the matter any further. Abolishment of capital punishment would, in my own understanding provoke chaos. The fact is, neither you nor I have the capability to entertain ourselves with such data, as the matter is solely subjective. There are various factors at play here, factors that would uniquely influence the crime rate of each and every country. Thus, you can never be certain. Regardless, I highly believe that criminals should fear Justice. If it was said that any given suspect would get away with murder, then perhaps the prize beats the punishment, then why not? I also believe that giving criminals such sharp advantage would be a sense of naive self. CLOSURE You might argue that it is inhumane to kill a self, and by doing so we bring ourselves to the criminal's level. Again I would like to remind you that any action that grinds in favor of the society should be accepted as a moral deed. Perhaps you have not entertained the thought that letting murderers and rapists live would trigger hatred and grudges within the victim's family? If they believe that Justice is not being served. They will go to extreme measures in order to descend revenge upon the offender. And that is when you have chaos. Maybe, the phenomena would even result in more angry people and potential criminals. That is why governments are hired, to hold the crowd from implementing the code of survival upon each other. Every need should be fulfilled and met in the most civilized ways. Also I would like to note: I believe that we are faced with two moral obligations when considering how to handle a criminal. Fortunately these are your own words, you believe that we are morally obliged to handle criminals. On what grounds are you claiming that sparing their lives is a moral thing? I could argue a different argument proposing that by doing so we are cleansing the society. I feel that you are being biased towards your opinion here, with no objective facts to support your argument. I believe the problem with your argument is that you are reasoning as if only one moral rule applies at a time.Once more you believe and assume, I never did say such thing. You are building an entire refutation based on an illusion. Where is your sense of Objectivity? In the end of your round you mention: I continue to conclude that the death penalty is immoral.Correct me if I am wrong, but you have not provided a premises in order to conclude. That is a logical fallacy in it's own end. Nevertheless you have not introduced but two arguments, the other round was utterly wasted on biased refutation.A)Deontological Analysis of Capital PunishmentB) Consequentialist Analysis of Capital PunishmentIf I understand your entire rephrased arguments it would be summarized within the context of the sinful act of capital punishment de-humanizes us. Why? You would be committing a grave mistake if you think that one's individual rights outweighs the majority.I look forward to your upcoming 'original argument'