The Death Penalty Should be Abolished!

FINAL ROUND!!!1. JusticeMy source here: http://www.hrw.org... that people do in fact suicide a load, as told from many many people's viewpoints. (Just jump to "Suicide Thoughts and Attempts" to get to the point)Cost: "we can't decide what punishment to use by seeing which one is the most cost-effective..." Actually we can...the economy is a very important role in our society. As for your source, have you even read it? It's trying to show how horrible plea-bargaining is; it's "perverse" and does not work out, as the paper even goes to say that plea bargaining "entails a reduced sanction", and mentions an excellent quote that points out the unfairness of plea-bargaining, which, when paraphrased, basically means "Judges care about how much convicted ultimately plead guilty, as much as a batting average matters to a baseball player." This suggests that nowadays, people are striving for better records so as to "win re-election or earn promotion", as the paper says. This shows how unfair the death penalty's forcing can be, if this really is the amazing torture-force-you-to-plead-guilty-card, then the judges will play it every single time. Again, with those innocent people...You can always rescue them within life sentence, but death penalty? Nope.InnocentsAh, here we go. My opponent tries talking about the weakness of imprisonment compared to imminent death and the effort put into those trials and cases. But why then, do they take so much darn longer? The death penalty trials might as well be life sentence for these guys! Discrimination:Without the death penalty, at least the innocent's family has time to sue or go for a re-trial. With death penalty, if they scramble and fail to find the evidence in that short time frame, BLAM. Innocent is dead forever forever dead.Death:You're right, I was absurd. I was only trying to throw you off with this argument. Cheap Labor:What do you mean? Once you say it's alright to take away their rights of happiness and further contentment by taking away their lives, the other second you say you cannot strip them of dignity and turn them into slaves. Either way you're stripping them of most/all rights, and the latter at least they can be productive to society. -.-Religion:My opponent is incorrect. More people support life without parole plus restitution. (Cheap labor is probably the best way to restitute, as I contended).From http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...... In fact, even police chief think the death penalty ineffective and dumb. (From:http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...)Deterence:As I stated before, why have the ineffective death penalty? Those other states without death penalty are actually living better.Yet another poll showing police thinking the death penalty very ineffective, from the same source mentioned above: See? Death Penalty simply ain't enough. Other things are much better and more effective, the death penalty does not really help to deter crime, even in the polices' eyes.Recidivism: This is a tough choice. Conceding this argument would give my arguments a big hit, yet argument number one is indeed my crucial core battery holding my arguments together.Let me phrase my rebuttal in a way that manages to hold BOTH ARGUMENTS UP.Okay, so I mentioned how my opponent made a straw-man argument in that he could not counter my prison-labor argument. As none of those escaping prisoners are from prison-labor, they do not apply to my counter-plan and do not help him case. I was surprised to see Uchi NOT rebut this argument or try to rebuild. Now, my opponent, my argument can go two ways. Voters, note this very very carefully. If the death penalty is really justified and you really win your argument about how it is the better punishment for prisoners, then you still lose because your own source suggests that they will die in prisons as much as people die in the average american town, which means that life sentence is not only as justified as death penalty, it is more moral because it takes a shorter time with its trials and costs less than the death penalty. Therefore, if you win the DP justified argument, life penalty will automatically be better.But what about the other way around? Yes, my opponent mentions how I contradict myself. Let us assume that in fact my opponent concedes the Death Penalty Justification argument, because if he wins that argument he only pushes forth life penalty, so he'll probably not want to win the DP justified argument. However, if death penalty really is "the easy way out", and life penalty also allows the "easy way out", which one do you want? Well, once again, life trials take shorter and cost less than the DP trials, as my sources suggest. Thus, although both are immoral (if we assume Death penalty isn't justified), Life penalty is still better because it's more efficient, and thus, in an ultitarianism perspective, more moral in comparison to the death penalty. You lose, UchihaMadara. VOTE ME.