Resolved: The United States should retain Capital Punishment for murder.

Since this is my last round, I will now do a point-by-point analysis of each point, and explain how they support my side. =His Case=CostMy Opponent has shown that the Death Penalty costs more in California. I contended that my Opponents link was biased, but after reviewing it I agree with him, it is not biased that was a mistake on my part. However, lets look at California's "death penalty". As I've said earlier, California has sentenced nearly 700 people to die, yet has only performed 13 executions in the past 35 years! Remember, the definition of "Death Penalty" brought up by my Opponent clearly states "administered", so all of the people on Death Row in every part of the country who will die before execution are irrelevant to this round becuase they are not truly being subjected to the Death Penalty. I stated this in my last round, and he made no response, meaning he has conceded to this statement. Thus his California and Kansas evidence must be dropped in this round, because the vast majority of the condemned in those states (100% in Kansas) are not executed. As for his Maryland evidence the quote he's shown only mentions a case, not the total cost of the DP. Also, my evidence still applies to this situation because it shows the costs of the Death Penalty leading up to an execution, whereas his hard evidence does not lead to the actual execution, only his estimate does. As for the issue of Plea Bargaining, my Opponent must have not read the source I provided showing that a guilty-plea to first degree murder happens over 10% more in death penalty states than non-death penalty states. Cost vs. JusticeLet's assume that the Death Penalty does cost more. As I've stated before, justice comes before money. My Opponent only response to this was "but this is just not so." followed by an analysis of what California could do with all the extra money. So he is valuing the money over justice. I have shown in my case that life without parole is less just than the DP, and his only major attack in his last round against that point was attacking my SPA that there are movements to abolish Life w/o parole. Since he has dropped his argument about the DP not being a true punishment, and has dropped my SPA about how prisoners prefer life to death, he has conceded that the DP is a more just form of punishment. This is significant because the attitude of prisoners towards a punishment is a good indicator to how just it is, after all surely murderers would prefer a 20 year sentence over a life sentence, and it would be cheaper but it certainly wouldn't be as just. This applies to the DP as well, we shouldn't value the money over the justice, because if we do why bother to prosecute and punish criminals at all? InnocenceMy Opponent has shown me another list of pardoned offenders. However the key element to this is that they were not executed. This shows how our current system of appeals and pardons works! Also, while there were a few cases from the 2000's in my Opponents list, the vast majority were convicted before DNA and forensic evidence became prevalent (I made a mistake in the last round, I truly meant to type this same thing but left off the "became prevalent" by mistake.) and before the recent Supreme Court cases lmiting the use of capital punishment (which my Opponent did not respond to)He has not shown a single murderer who was executed and later pardoned. He makes an absurd statement that because I used the word innocent instead of pardon his point still stands, when he has not proven innocence. He states that "The people that were executed were quite clearly not given a fair trial!" with all due respect to my Opponent (and I mean that sincerely, I have a lot of respect for him.) neither he, nor the site he linked is qualified to make that analysis. The people who are qualified to make that analysis (such as the Jurors, the Supreme Court, the State Board of Paroles and Pardons) all found these people guilty, and agreed that the trial was fair, or else they wouldn't have approved the executions. He has not provided even one case where an innocent was actually executed. Since I have shown innocents killed due to prisoners sentenced to life without parole, this point is outweighed.=My Case=C1SPAMy Opponent contends that the Taylor evidence is un-important because it could happen with any crime. While the statement is true, the objection is not. What I am showing here is that murderers sentenced to life imprisonment can and do kill again. The only way to be certain that a murderer will not kill again is to execute them. My Opponent continues to argue that since these acts could be committed by any prisoners, that they are not useful for my case. I truly cannot understand what he is trying to say here. So these crimes could be committed by other offenders..so what? I've shown how life without parole, the sentence he champions, is still dangerous to the public because murderers can still kill again. Executed murderers cannot so this point stands. More examples: The Texas 7, I do not know what their sentences were, but they were in a maximum security prison and still escaped, and went on a crime spree killing many innocent people.[1]Martsay Bolder, sentenced to life imprisonment and murdered his cellmate.[2].Donald Dillbeck- sentenced to life imprisonment for murder in 1979, escaped in 1990 and murdered a woman while attempting to steal her car.[3].Martsay Bolder- while serving a life sentence for murder, killed cellmate.[4].James Prestridge-sentenced to life w/o parole for murder, escaped from prison and murdered his fellow escapee (serving a sentence for robbery)[5].There are only some of the many cases of killers who have killed again. SPB: My Opponent states that my since the muder rate continued to rise after the DP was reinstated, this proves that the DP does not deter. However he ignored my analysis that the DP was used very spariodically until the passing of the DP act of 1994, and then murder rates fell. He also criticises my studies, but as I said earlier, he is hardly qualified to make such an analysis about them. He states that in Texas the murder rate fell and then remained the same, and this shows that the DP does not deter. Well the murder rate in TX has remained fairly steady since 2001, as has the execution rate of around 20-30 per year[6]. So you can see that this objection actually supports my side because it shows that the murder rate is consistent with the execution rate. To give another exaple, since the DP act of 1994 murder rates in Virginia (another state where the DP is used very commonly) have fallen significantly.[7]. The ACLU evidence my Opponent has shown does not give enough data to assess if the DP deters, indeed he has only shown 3 specific years, where as I have shown that since the DP has been increased in use after 1994, murder rates have significantly fallen. Thus this point standsC2.SPAMy Opponent contends that since I cannot prove that Life w/o parole will be abolished after Capital Punishment. I agree, I cannot prove what will happen in the future, however I have established that there is a historical precedent, indeed I've given evidence from Europe, and heres another example from the U.S. Melvin Geary was sentenced to life w/o parole, had it moved down to life, and was later released and murdered a 71 yeard old woman. More evidence as to the movments to abolish LWOP can be found, heres an example of a report advocating LWOP abolition[8].SPBDropped, extend. =Conclusion=My Opponents contentions fall because they are based on specific examples from a small amount of states where a true Death Penalty does not exist. Mine stand because they are based on a broad spectrum using states that use the Death Penalty in earnest which is a more accurate way to assess it. I urge you to vote Pro, and thank my Opponent. Sources in comments.