Resolved: The United States should abolish the death penalty.

I will prove to you that the United States or any other nation should not abolish the Death Penalty. I thank the affirmative side (the one who setup the debate, in simple words) for letting me participate in this debate. Please put in mind that the motion assumes that the person being punished is mentally competent and very much aware of what he/she is doing. Anyhow, let me first tell you what the IDEA is that the death penalty wishes to solve. It's main point is to simply punish crimes committed by a person which forfeits his right to live. It is simply like slapping the buttocks of a child because he/she does not follow the rules of his parents. Now, let me rebut the cases of the affirmative. He said that the DEATH PENALTY DOES NOT DETER CRIME. To prove the idea, he used mere statistics. Sure, the statistics of which goes very well in your favor. But I ask you this, why was the death penalty created in the first place? Let me answer this question. The death penalty was created simply because it wanted to PUNISH heinous crimes. It is merely coincidental if it does deter crime or not. Let's face it: no matter how many laws we put, there will always be crime. If, by coincidence, the death penalty lessens the crime rate, that would be a good thing now, would it? Next, he said that Life IN PRISON IS CHEAPER THAN THE DEATH PENALTY therefore, instead of killing criminals, we will just imprison them for their whole life time. I ask you this. Is the United States so poor that it needs to save on money and bargain what punishment is more expensive? I think not. It's just like saying "why don't we just buy herb medicines instead of buying expensive pills since it is way cheaper". What is wrong with it? We want to punish these criminals URGENTLY. And if you care about costs...let's say a lot of criminals are in the same prison and that it happens that the prison becomes "full". Think about the costs of transportation and with the inevitability of creating new prisons. Aren't you giving us all a myopic view of society? Lastly, he said that DEATH PENALTY IS BAD. Period. Bad is all about the absence of morality. And where do our morals come from? It's all based on religion...and saying that something is bad just because religion or ethics says so is myopic when you can think about the BENEFITS of the DEATH PENALTY. And about cruelty...why does want to be merciful to criminals anyway? Do you think that they deserve to be given mercy upon to? I think not. If the United States cared about mercy, why did it create the death penalty in the first place if it really cared about mercy? Simple...because it is the criminal's "just desert". And, once you think about it...why should we care about being merciful towards these criminals? What good would they do to us if they continued to live? I say, nothing. Listen here, the government was created for the good of man kind. It has the right to punish us for our wrong doings. If it has to punish criminals because they committed a heinous crime, what right do you have to deprive them of that right? Nothing. And let's think about it, if an innocent person is found guilty and sentenced to death, that is not the fault of the death penalty, it is the fault of the stupidity of the law enforcers. Now, without further redo, let me proceed to my case. Case: On how doers of heinous crimes forfeited their rights to live. In the status quo, we can see the many effects of heinous crimes. What are these "heinous crimes"? Murder, rape, etc. etc. If you were the victim of any of these crimes, what effect does it have on you? So simple, it is like you lost everything. Why should we, then, give mercy to these criminals, hm? If they took advantage of a person, not thinking about the effects of it to him/her....why do we continually insist that it is not "right"? Simple question. Simple answer. Because...it is simply "wrong". Thank you for giving me the opportunity to debate this topic. :)