Capital punishment as a form of justice

1) Capital Punishment reduces crime rates by 3.47%. This happens to be an article I read in the times of India a couple of days or so ago. However, I have not yet been able to find a source to this article on the net. Therefore, I shall not be able to furnish a source to the above argument. However, I assure you it is true. Now, since my opponent views every move of mine with a suspicious eye, let me provide him with concrete evidence to prove that capital punishment does indeed reduce crime rates. a)A study by Joanna M. Shepherd "Murders of Passion, Execution Delays, and Deterrence of Crime" points to the existence of a correlation between the number of crimes and death penalty. To find this relationship, she looks at monthly murder and execution data using least squares and negative binomial estimations. Her conclusion is that one execution helps to avert three killings on average. Capital punishment also has an effect on murders by intimates and crimes of passion. The influence is evidenced by rates of crimes committed by victims of both European and Afro-American descent. The deterring effect of death penalty, however, was found to be reduced by longer waits on the death row. As a result of this trend, "one less murder is committed for every 2.75-years reduction in death row waits" (Shepherd 2003:27). b) Another paper exploring the relationship between crime rates and death penalty is "State Executions, Deterrence and the Incidence of Murder" by Paul R. Zimmerman uses U.S. state-level data over the years 1978-1997 to find out if capital punishment indeed has a deterrent effect. The paper, in evaluating the deterrent effect of capital punishment, adjusts the data for the influence of simultaneity and therefore comes up with estimates of a deterrent effect that greatly those of previous findings. Zimmermann has found that "the estimates imply that a state execution deters approximately fourteen murders per year on average" Zimmerman 2004:163). Besides, he has established that it is the announcement of death penalty that drives the effect. The above mentioned facts clearly show that capital punishment does indeed bring about a decline in crime rates. Source: http://www.tailoredessays.com... P.S: Read the arguments section in the above source. It furnishes clear evidence to prove my point. 2)In India court cases are completed within five years The case of Ajmal Kasab, as I stated above is, in itself enough evidence to prove my point in this issue. If you take the trouble of exploring that on the net, you will realize that it took approximately 3 and a half years for the case to be wrapped up in the supreme court. 3) The additional charges of the Death Penalty is only $75000 That is an approximate figure. To be more precise, your source put it at about 80,000 to 90,000$ per person. I'd like to point out yet again that those figures only pertain to an isolated area. His own source points out that the judicial systems in California are extremely slow, in fact the slowest in the country. Usually, as I claimed before, it is cheaper to administer capital punishment. 4) The Death Penalty wastes both time and money My opponent adamantly claims that death penalty is costlier than life imprisonments, however, he fails to explain how it is so even though both have the very same procedure as well as the same trial process. I'd like him to work on a decent explanation for that. Secondly, yes, Kasab is on death row. However, his prosecution was wound up nearly half a year ago. The only reason why he has not yet been prosecuted and that his presidential pardon has not yet been rejected is because of the protests of a certain communal group in our nation and of course, because of dolts like my respected opponent who protest against capital punishment. I'd also like to refute the argument "making his own rebuttal a shining argument against capital punishment" by pointing out that handing out a life sentence to Kasab will mean the payment of thousands of crores funds by the government for his maintenance as he will have to be provided with protection and also a high security cell for the rest of his life. You see, Kasab, being a terrorist is a matter of concern to the government and thus, he'll have to be provided with guards to ensure that no militant group gets the notion to rescue him. Think about it rationally....if the government has to spend 25 crores or so for his protection for three years, how much will they have to spend in protecting him for a lifetime?? Let me draw my opponent's attention to the fact that Kasab is indeed kept in a high security cell in Arthur Road jail and therefore, our security is not at all lax, thank you very much. My source in the previous round highlights the above fact, however I'll post it yet again, just to ensure that the voters read it. Source:http://www.ndtv.com... 5) The Death Penalty carries the risk of wrongful execution My argument in round 4 was a mere response to your round 3 argument. I'd also like to point out that you keep on contradicting yourself when you make that point. If I actually concede to having contradicted myself( which I won't because I haven't) then it is evident that my opponent has contradicted himself too and that he actually is conceding a point. 6)The justice system is not solely based on vengeance My opponent essentially concedes that official figures do actually indicate that there are criminals who commit crimes after they are let out. There is the additional fact that Every year around five per cent are returned to prison for breaching the terms of their licence. This can include committing further crimes but also offenders failing to comply with the terms of their release. Jon Venables was jailed for life for the murder of toddler James Bulger in 1993 but released just eight years later. Last year he was jailed again for downloading scores of indecent images of sickening child sex abuse. These are all evidences from the same source. Secondly, I believe that a psychopath who feels remorse after committing a murder, who genuinely regrets it and wishes to be cured may be send to an asylum for treatment. However, mass murder and genocide are unpardonable crimes beyond redemption. A person who commits such crimes is unpardonable , especially because he fails to show remorse and enjoys it. Such a person deserves to be sentenced to the gallows. I'd also like to point out that Kasab, who according to my opponent was not deterred by the prospect of capital punishment is currently pleading for his life. Following that train of thought, if criminals are not afraid to die, then why do they actually appeal to higher courts if they are sentenced to death? Why don't they just accept their guilt and leave it at that? I'll tell you why. They have a genuine fear for their life. Every criminal does. Conclusion Believe me con, I have no intention of making the voters feel insecure. Votes are in fact, the farthest thing from my mind right now. I have proved in my first point that there is indeed a relation b/w capital punishment and plummeting crime rates. I'd also like my opponent to open the front page of any newspaper and read about the number of crimes committed every day. The truth is that the police force now a days is only able to arrest the guilty and fails to prevent crimes and avert catastrophes. Going by what my opponent said, a great number of criminals brought before the judiciary are innocent.( I, of course do not believe that) However, if it is indeed so, then that highlights yet another shortcoming of the police force. Therefore, my opponent's lacklustre arguments have failed to prove anything while I have proved my point. P.S.: Over to con. Great debate mate. Really enjoyed it. You are a good debater. Look forward to more debates.