This house believes that capital punishment is wrong.

Let's Continue Opponent: "My opponent's world view is simplistic and naive. Of course some people deserve to die, especially if their death could preserve the lives of others. Sure, our maximum security prisoners are rather secure, but is it really our right to take the risk of a break out? According to my opponent, 'two wrongs don't make a right', but what about three wrongs? Will we stand up and stop this cycle of violence after one death, or will we allow more to happen?" I'd like to draw special attention to the phrase, "but is it really our right to take the risk of a break out?". With EVERY imprisonment their comes a risk of a jail break. Similarly, with every sentence of death their is a risk of executing an innocent person (blood spewed for a useless cause). So is it really our right to take the risk of a wrongful death? Also, in my personal opinion, life imprisonment is a much harsher penalty than death. Think about it, with death you know that you are getting out some day, and if you believe in God you will go to Heaven. But, with life imprisonment their is no "getting out" you are destined to be rotting in that cell for the rest of your life. And I believe that is more horrible than death. Opponent: "Furthermore, public opinion is absolutely in favor of capital punishment. 52% of the world-wide population (so including countries where capital punishment is abolished) support the death penalty and 64% of Americans support capital punishment. I would not say that public opinion should dictate morality of trump human rights, but this is not relevant; these criminals have no rights. They forfeited them the moment they decided to betray a fundamental human right. This makes them lower than a cockroach or a speck of dust." These criminals have no rights? No rights? Why, this is clearly in violation with any doctrine that's even been written on the subject of rights (The Declaration of Independence, The Geneva Papers, etc.). To say that a person deserves to die because he killed another is like saying: A three year old deserves to never eat again because he stole a cookie from the cookie jar. Killing these criminals just brings us down to their level. Opponent: "Yes, occasionally people are wrongly convicted, but you defeat your own point when you say that they were released -from death row.- This speaks volumes to the American judicial sector; they generally get the right guy. This is also why 'death row' can last as long as 33 years. While I would agree that some innocent people have been executed, I would actually suggest that capital punishment has freed some prisoners. Being on death row means your case is increasingly scrutinized and looked over. Furthermore, with our new forensic technology, being falsely convicted is becoming increasingly rare. It is also vindicating older criminals that have been on death row for decades. What we have is a system that has many checks and balances but stills allow the justice system to deal with these deplorable beings." You use the word "occasionally" in sentence one. However, we have no way to prove that wrongful execution only occurs "occasionally" in fact 1 in 4 prisoners in America today maintain their innocence. I know that some of them lie; so maybe 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 is a better indicator, but what about those that don't lie? Well, some of them are on death row and some of them will be executed for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Is it really our right to take that risk? And you still haven't answered the fundamental question: "What rights do are government have when it comes in regard to the sanctity of human life?" and "How does killer the killer make it right."