There is no good reason for the death penalty to be banned .

It appears my opponent has chosen to take the easy road which I hope those who take the time to vote will note. It is very easy to make a declaration and say now prove me wrong, you are starting with the basic assumption that there is a good reason to perpetuate the death penalty. It seems the only good reason you can provide for this is that you think it's right. Well in that case I think it's wrong. End of story. But it's not that easy, for anyone who wants to have an intellectual standpoint they must have an intellectual reasoning, not feelings and emotions. In order for you to walk away from this debate feeling that in any small capacity that your point is superior to mine I feel you must state why your reasoning is valid. But if you cannot or will not that is fine. I will make my points all the same. The death penalty is wildly more expensive for the government to execute. As I stated before, just for the legal proceedings alone it is 1.8 million dollars. This is the equivalent of keeping someone jailed for 60 years. In addition to the 1.8 million dollars for legal fees is the cost of execution and the cost of incarcerating them for an elongated period of time(5-20 years). This means it is going to cost more to kill someone than to incarcerate them for the rest of their life. I said that a convict will live 60-70 years, if you look correctly, so I made no mistake for you to correct. Again, you make the point that the death penalty would be rare. It does not matter how uncommon an atrocity is, if it is wrong it should never be done, not just every once and a while. The reason why I brought up the expense of the death penalty is because for some reason you felt the need to bring up that you would execute people by shooting them. I did not see the relevance in this unless you think that lethal injection is expensive and that by shooting them you would save the state money. So I brought up how the method of execution is negligible in the expense. Again, I do not think it is reasonable to hide behind a title and use it as some shield as if what you say is axiomatic and needs no proof. But if this is the stance that you will take, so be it. I will dismiss of your argument in any case. Justice Do you feel as though there is some kind of justice in killing someone? Is claiming their life how you seek to claim justice? I feel as if incarcerating someone for there entire life, making them live and dwell on it, putting them in the legal confines of jail which force these rebels to adhere to rules and listen and respect someone else, that's justice. Not the quick way out, not the easy way for everybody, but the hard way. Their freedoms are taken from them, and that's justice. Not killing them, incarcerating them. So if you feel that there is greater justice in quickly killing them, then I would disagree wholeheartedly. Set an example A lot of people think that killing someone sets an example and that this will deter other criminals. Of course, this is foolish logic. Crime statistics show that crime has not gone down in any demonstrable amount in states, cities, and elsewhere where the death penalty is in more common use. It is impossible to deter criminals with the thought of consequence because they do not weigh consequences to their actions. Mostly their actions are not premeditated and even if they are they always believe that they will get away with it. No one commits the crime thinking they will get caught and us such the thought of punishment will deter them, meaning the idea of deterrence is an ineffective reason to support the death penalty. Expense We've already covered this in depth and I feel I've proven quite enough that the death penalty is far more expensive than life incarceration. Please tell me I do not need to further prove this. Moral Some people say that it is moral to kill them. An eye for an eye sort of thing, it's 'the right thing to do'. Taking this from a religious point of view, killing a man before his creator is ready to take him deprives him of the opportunity to repent and become a good person. This denies him his chance to make it into heaven, or whatever you choose to believe in. I cannot see anything moral in killing a man, and putting the power to kill men in the hands of men. Again, if you need citation of these facts they can be provided though I think at this point that's a little superfluous. If you can provide equivalent reasoning for your side, please do so.