Death Penalty Ought to Be Legal for Capital Crimes

I acknowledge my opponent's recognition of their misinterpretation of the Bible verse. Because they cannot supply another verse supporting their point about people that make up the government being equal to other people, their point does not stand. Kuttu countered my point about deterrence with: "A law or punishment should not be merely a form of deterrence. It should be a way to enforce and promote good values and attitudes. Simply putting a barrier rather than giving people the opportunity to change their ways will not change anything in my opinion." But the fact is that punishment promotes good values. This is my first point. Punishment promotes good values. A person who has murdered is a DANGER to society. Showing mercy to the worst criminals DOES NOT promote good values. It makes sense that it will cause worse problems in society. Punishing criminals in the worst way is the ONLY way to deter future criminals. Kuttu goes on to say: "There will always be crimes, the law will always be broken and so it cant be said that a death penalty is the complete answer to problems." What the death penalty does is make LESS crimes. Ideally, it COULD create a crimeless society but the least it can do is significantly REDUCE crime. The death penalty is the closest thing to a complete answer to problems. Then Kuttu contradicted everything he just argued by saying: "My point is that if this act was lifted or simply if the criminals were to move to a location where the death penalty is not in place, then crime rates will increase again." Yes, that is true. If murderers are moved to a city with no death penalty, then of course crime rates will increase again. Therefore there is yet another advantage to the death penalty: that murderers can no longer kill. Kuttu appears to agree with me on this by saying that crime rates increase in places with no death penalty. Kuttu again agrees with me in a round-about way here: "A death penalty will not ensure the stability of our community in the long-term as in order for a more permanent state of stability. peace and prosperity needs to occur because people are willing to refuse immoral acts, not just because of the punishments placed by the law, although I accept that this will have an impact." IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT. Nothing the negative can possibly bring up will have an impact as much as the death penalty. The death penalty IS a stabilizing device for justice. Punishment is the only way to restore justice. Kuttu clarifies his question: "You mentioned how 'Only the taking of the murderer's life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.' My question is why does this verse only apply to the public and why does it not to the government should they make a mistake in their judgement." I see the question now even though he still forgot to add a question mark. He's saying that if the government makes a mistake, then it doesn't restore justice. Today forensic technology has progressed an immense amount, so the event of a false conviction is extremely unlikely. We have to look at the whole picture. With the death penalty MORE innocent people are saved (like the statistics I read before). False convictions are so unlikely it's hardly a reason to prohibit the death penalty. Kuttu concludes by saying: "Also, I would appreciate if you made it clear to which extent a death penalty should be placed. Do you think that death penalties should apply for every serious crime or murder irrespective of the circumstances (such as the accidental killing) or do you think that it should only be applicable in certain situations? If so which?" At the very beginning of the round I said, "The United States should have death penalty for capital offenses, which include first-degree murder and treason." For clarification purposes, first degree murder is defined by FindLaw (which is a credible legal source): "An unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated." Accidental killing (or manslaughter) is second-degree murder, so it does not apply. Premeditated simply means it is intentional, the premeditation may take place anywhere from months to a few seconds before the actual murder. It's up to the jury to decide what degree of murder the crime is. Both murder and treason are legally recognized as capital crimes, and the death penalty should apply in those situations.