Death Penalty

I accept the terms of the rules and will post my case. But before I do, keep in mind these are not my opinions, simply things I have researched in an attempt to put on a fair and unbiased debate. Before we begin, let us realize that this debate should be weighed by lives and economics. Furthermore, if I convince you that the death penalty saves lives and is economically sound, I win the debate. With this in mind, I will begin. I affirm the Death Penalty for the following contentions. Contention 1: Deterrent effect While often contested, there is an obvious example of the effectiveness of the death penalty in modern times if we were to turn to an Emory University study in 2001 has found a clear deterrent effect in their study. They claim that the most robust finding in the study is the fact that they have found that the arresting, execution, and sentencing records ouch the theory of a strong deterrent effect on murders. The study goes on to say that the more we spend on the Judiciary system and police force, the more effective the police system is, which means we weed out more murderers. . http://cjlf.org... These findings are supported by Dr. Paul Zimmerman who states the following: "Specifically, it is estimated that each state execution deters somewhere between 4 and 25 murders per year…” . https://www.unc.edu... The deterrent effect is said to work through econometrics, or the application of statistical and economic theories to determine truth value or come to a conclusion. . http://www.investopedia.com... In other words, we need to see that criminals, much like what is described in my first citation, think like they are purchasing an item by weighing the consequences and using the same decisions we use to make a smart, fiscal decision. This means that criminals are likely going to weigh death with killing an innocent person, resulting in them feeling deterred to go through with such action. Being tough on crime sends a message to criminals that is important. This statement shows that crime does not pay, and those that commit crime will suffer the consequences of said crime, whether execution or time in prison. This will in turn convince criminals that the actions that they would have taken would result in even more pain and problems in prison. We can actually see the effect of having smaller amounts of executions if we turn toward the recent statistics provided by the FBI in 2014, where although murder is shown to decrease, rape and aggravated assault charges increased after the death penalty was used less often. . https://www.fbi.gov... What needs to be done is clear, let us become tough on crime to protect the American public. Vote pro. Contention 2: Lack of alternatives The death penalty seems to be the only option for the most heinous killers and criminals. If we look at Psychology Today, we see that conditions such as psychopathy are prevalent in criminal activity and have no known cure at the moment. . https://www.fbi.gov... Also, according to the ACLU, between 5 and 10% of all death row inmates suffer from a severe mental health disease. . https://www.aclu.org... This is not necessarily treatable and also not necessarily effective. Remember, many dangerous criminals showed very little empathy or remorse for crimes, leading many to see them as psychopaths. Other alternatives that seem sensible are actually not. My opponent may bring up maximum security prison as an alternative as well. However, this fails on the face value of expenses. The average cost of a security prison is absurdly high. The average cost of a prisoner in a maximum security prison is $200,000 a year. This is a huge problem as we spend over 190 million dollars every year for prisoners which is not going to the American people and not benefitting the American economy. . http://www.golocalprov.com... Federal reform can’t fix this problem as the livelihood of the prisoners are still highly valued at a high security prison. Not only this, bet despite high security prisons being secure, there are always ways for prisoners to escape and continue to harm society. There are multiple examples, but a recent Chicago Tribune article describes the escape of three prisoners from a high security prison which resulted in manhunts due to the situation. With this in mind, we must neutralize threats and not assume that the criminal will not escape. . http://www.businessinsider.com... What is clear is the fact that the alternatives that could be proposed to Capital Punishment are not going to be effective at not only curtailing violence and crime, but also, there is no guarantee that that the alternatives will warrant more effective solutions. Because of this, affirm. Contention 3: Cost My opponent will claim that the cost of the death penalty is too high to be worth the effects. However, we need to realize that there is another actor many people do not take into account when stating this. In fact, according to Criminal Justice Legal Foundation study in 2009, we can see the following: “The average county with the death penalty disposes of 18.9% of murder cases with a plea and a long sentence, compared to 5.0% in counties without the death penalty. ” . http://www.cjlf.org... This is important due to the fact that the majority of the death penalty costs come from the legal and judicial system being nuanced with many rules and regulations. Not only this, but court costs are huge due to the fact that it is a life or death situation which is in the hands of each lawyer involved. However, these plea bargains are going to be saving money in the status quo despite what my opponent may claim. In fact, when we look toward the Death Penalty Information Center, we can see an overview of a Seattle University Study showing the costs of the death penalty showing the following: “Defense costs were about three times as high in death penalty cases and prosecution costs were as much as four times higher than for non-death penalty cases. ” . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... Plea bargains will substantially reduce this price with less work for the judicial system to do. According to a 1989 study by the Yale Law Journal study, we can see definitely see huge cost reductions with plea bargain being used, which means that ultimately shows the reduced costs of the death penalty, regardless of what my opponent will say. . https://www.jstor.org... Contention 4: Reforms necessary I will concede that the capital punishment program is ineffective in many ways that seem to be tangible. However, not only are these problems overstated, but there are many ways to fix these problems as opposed to simply abolishing the death penalty completely. For instance, we can clearly see that more funding to the judicial system and policing system will make the process more proficient. Not only this, but the accidental execution of innocent people is a problem as well and needs to be fixed through a more informed and trained jury. We can also spend more on lawyers for those with the inability to pay for representation that is effective. The point is, any problem my opponent provides can be easily shown to be fixed through implementation of reform that would ultimately be solvent. My opponent’s resolution does not mention the current system or future system and simply asks if the United States should have a death penalty, meaning this argument is valid. Not only this, but we need to weigh lives over anything else in this debate, and since I have proven the deterrent effect occurs in the status quo, we need to see the impacts of this which includes higher public safety and less criminals on the street resulting in less lives lost as shown from my statistic from Dr. Zimmerman in my first contention.