Some crimes should be punishable by death, as long as a much higher standard of proof is upheld.

I will start by apologizing to the pro side and to our precious readers for failing to provide a source for the cost argument. Here it is: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org...I was too hasty, and I am extremely desolated. I will pay more attention from now on.I won't be rebutting the rebutals of the pro side, as I am interested in dedicating round 3 to his main argument which is the morality involved in the death sentence. I shall leave it to our readers to decide whether pro has successfully rebutted my arguments (round 2) or not. Let's begin.Pro has stated that "those who kill or otherwise commit heinous crimes against innocent civilians are the cancer of society." I am not going to focalize on the cancer tumour analogy claiming that it does not fit in order to rebut his argument. In fact, I shall be embracing it and using it against pro. Read thoroughly:Before doing that, I shall adress the ideology of "punishment & vendetta" which states that that justice, or/and the law has the duty to punish criminals and to get rid of an individual that has harmed society and may harm it again, and that it has to avenge victims of heinous crimes. I believe the morality behind this ideology is corrupted and misses the true goal and design of justice. But, it goes on, 'it is necessary that society should avenge the victims, that society should punish.' - Neither: To avenge is of the individual, to punish is of God, and Society/law/justice is between the two in the hiearchy.Society's duty is to correct and ameliorate. Not to punish, and not to avenge.You treat crime as a malady, as a sickness. That's the right way to do it. But the sickness, or the cancer as you put it, doesn't reside in the criminal or in the crime he has commited, but instead resides on the origin of the crime, or in other words the motives of the person and what has lead that said person to commit murder, steal etc. Crime has always existed. And it still exists. It's clear that we are dealing with crime the wrong way, focalizing on the crime instead of the source of the crime. Because this is where your analogy goes wrong: research done on medicine, and the scientific breakthroughs achieved in that field aren't to develop new ways to physically extract cancer from the body, they are done to develop ways of eradicating the source of the disease altogther, to make us immune from it, to heal us from it.Sickness has to be treated with care, with attention, and most importantly it must be studied thoroughly, it has to have its source identified, eradicated. Our readers must have noticed by now that I am centering the debate on not the crime or the criminals themselves, but on the source of the said crime, because it is a requirement in order for us to eradicate crime. Just like how you deal with sickness in medicine, you have to go to a prison, and observe the inclination of each prisoner, gather data, understand why person A was lead to murder that innocent civilian, or why person B had to steal from that store. Are criminals actually guilty, or is it that the society itself is guilty?Because yes, society itself bears a part of guilt whenever an innocent civilian has been murdered. Fact is: poverty and misery leads to crime, and to get rid of crime is to get rid of poverty. Poverty is justice denied: this needs to change. (1 & 2). No matter how many people you hang, crime is never going to stop, because the problem lies on society and on government, and not on the individuals themselves. To kill an individual for something he has no power over is senseless, defies the bases of justice, and is straight up barbary! Educate, enlighten, heal, and correct the heads, and you will not need to cut them.Not to mention mental sickness and psychology, but perhaps I can leave that to another round since I am lacking space to properly develop my ideas."You teach people to not kill, but how?... by killing." This quote from Victor Hugo shows the hypocrisy of the penalty of death, and with that that said, I affirm my stance. I thank Pro for his time, I am thoroughly enjoying this debate.(1): https://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk...(2): http://journals.sagepub.com...