Light Yagami is what the world needs

Once again I commend my opponent on his timely response. To clarify, "BOP" means "burden of proof".My opponent's argument is essentially that of consequentialism. Crime went down, therefore Light's actions are justified. My opponent refuses to back this statement (crime went down) with a source, but I can vouch for it's validity as I am fairly familiar with the series.There are several problems with this approach. 1. Imperfect KnowledgeLight Yagami is not omniscient. He can only base his judgements on what little information he is privy to, meaning mistakes can and most likely will be made often. This risk alone is enough to deter most people from supporting such a system.2. Light is HypocriticalHis goal is to cleanse the world of criminals, but his only means of doing this is to kill them via his deathnote. This means he isn't really solving the problem of murdering, he's just monopolizing the service. Sure, he thinks his killing is justified, but then again so does virtually every murderer, especially the infamous and murderous political leaders we so ardently loathe such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. Ultimately, murder rates don't really drop in the series, Light merely takes over the bulk of murders.3. End may not Justify the MeansOnce again, Light is not omniscient. There is no guarantee that his methods would actually work in real life. It is absolutely possible that the fear of imminent death at any time will result in pandemonic rioting rather than fearful obedience. Furthermore, it's also possible that Light's methods may simply result in murderers being more clever about keeping their names a secret (Light needs both the name and the mental image of the person to kill them), making his methods worse than ineffectual as catching these criminals is now harder for the police as well. My opponent then argues that Light has great hair. I cannot deny this, his hair is impeccable. However This argument is ultimately a non-sequitur as "good hair" =/= "good leader".My opponents final argument is a logical fallacy known as "false dichotomy". My opponent states that, "All I wan't is a solid statement on why he shouldn't be god to accomplish the goal of creating a justified world? He does bad things with good intentions. DO you support the criminals?" -- insinuating that not agreeing with Light's methods is the same as supporting criminals. This is not the case. There are alternative methods for dealing with criminals other than mass homicide such as the current justice system which allows judgement to be given by jury of the defendants peers rather than one homicidal teenager with a shoddy moral compass. Our system isn't perfect, but it's better than the alternative my opponent is arguing.To reiterate, Light's lack of perfect knowledge, along with his warped and selfish disposition outlined in my original argument, shows that the world would not only not benefit from Light's tyrannical reign, but the world would actually be worse off than it would be without him at all, especially in the light of already existing justice systems.I will now end my argument with a quote. The implications of this quote are obvious:"Death solves all problems — no man, no problem."- Joseph Stalin, Generalissimus of the Soviet Union who saw to the deaths of roughly 40 million people during his time in power.