The Death Penalty Should be Ended for ALL Cases

To begin my closing argument, I will put down some points my opponent did not address in the conclusion. To begin, my opponent claims that the death penalty does not economically benefit us at all, when in fact; it does. Stated under "Costs of the Death Penalty", it states that the reason why people claim the Death Penalty is expensive is because of how long the execution takes. In my previous argument, I stated that the Death Penalty's execution needs to be done instantaneously to provide the effect of saving money, and actually deter crime. Quoted by myself, in the last round, I stated: "If one murderer is executed instantly, it would prevent at least 1 murder of any civilian. So technically, the Death Penalty does deter crime; but the issue is how long it takes for the Death Penalty to take effect. In reality, the Death Penalty should be an instant action, instead of a long drawn out session when the final decision was made". And my opponent even agrees with this, with the given quote in this round: "However, the legal process and the decades criminals are on death row make it the more expensive choice". The cost to keep doing constant trials for the determination of the Death Penalty is what is holding us back for a more economic solution; while my opponent just claims it does not benefit the economy, without any evidence to support his or her argument. As well as there are other methods to achieve the death of an individual, which my opponent ignores, and also denies it on being cheap; even though he or she does not have any evidence to support his or her own argument once more. Then, my opponent claims that I ignored the statistic of the United States being within the top 5 of most other countries with the highest amount of deaths. I did not ignore it and did address it, stating that it makes us a more aggressive country then. I even asked my opponent with the following quote: "So is it still bad to be an aggressive country"; and he or she did not answer my question. Because of this, my opponent has no true argument within this section of the argument. My opponent also continues to strain the racism point of view within the Death Penalty; by a constant push within the argument. To counter argue, I wish to bring up numerous statistics in disprove my opponent. Stated under "Does a Person's Race Affect the Likelihood of Him/Her Receiving the Death Penalty", many doctors and psychologists claim that there is not enough evidence to make a "strong argument" for racism within the Death Penalty. Most just say that in hopes to save themselves and, or loved one. And many of these claims are made within this website, as well as within this PDF file (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...) it states that 55.5% of whites have been executed for their crimes, compared to Blacks and Latinos which, in total, make about 42-43% of executions. That is a much different fact, than what my opponent perceives. My opponent really only used one source of evidence, while I used three within the whole debate. And my opponent, in this round, still tries to argue about the possible mistakes with the Death Penalty. Previously, I brought up a static that only 1 in 25 inmates are actually executed accidentally. My opponent claims that this should not happen at all, even though its a low chance of happening in the first place, because no one deserves death for being an "innocent" inmate. I must ask then, why are they there in the first place? Referring back to my first argument of "self responsibility", it is the fault of the inmate for committing any crime in the first place. If they did not want to be in the position of possibly being "mistaken" as a death row inmate, don't do any crime. You are responsible for yourself, and no one else! My opponent also asks me a question if I was in a situation of being in death row, even though I did nothing. I, of course, would be afraid; but I wouldn't be in jail in the first place. I would stay away from any sort of criminal action, to the best of my ability, and not do anything "idiotic". Such a simple concept, yet no one understands it. Finally, my opponent claims that I have "ignored" his case on the Death Penalty for not lowering crimes. I did, in fact I did it once in this round already at the beginning, and in the previous round. In the previous round, I provided two sources on how it deters crime. The sources being: "The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives" and "Do more executions mean fewer murders"; clearly more sources than my opponent. And within these sources explain that the Death Penalty can reduce the rates of crime by striking fear within criminals. The reasoning why many claim that the effect doesn't work is because of the amount of time before an execution does get taken into effect. If the time was shortened, it is expected that the Death Penalty will benefit us from crime and economically wise. I did not ignore this argument of my opponent, who is just making up claims without looking at my evidence. To conclude the argument, I will discuss how the debate went and who you should vote for. In the first round, my opponent provided an alright case; as did I. But in the second round, did not put all his or her rebuttals within the argument; while I "negated" all of my opponents claims and arguments. And in this round, my opponent makes false accusations of me ignoring his or her arguments, even though I addressed them in the second and this round of the debate. I provided plenty more resources to disprove my opponents argument, while he or she only provided a source here and there. And my opponent did not argue about the event of one man killing loads of people, presented with the Boston Bombing example, which shows that point was dropped; while I "pursued" against my opponents arguments. The Death Penalty should not be eliminated from all cases! Voters, who do you vote for? My opponent who provided few arguments with really no evidence, and only focused on one part of his or her argument; or myself who provided strong arguments, counter arguments, and loads of evidence to support my arguments. Thank you for debating with me my opponent, and I thank those for watching (or reading)! Sources (All): http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... http://deathpenalty.procon.org... http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... http://deathpenalty.org...... http://www.heritage.org...... http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu...... http://www.vice.com...... http://www.prodeathpenalty.com...... http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org...... http://www.theonion.com...... http://www.slate.com...... http://www.seattletimes.com...... https://sites.google.com...... http://www.history.com...... http://deathpenalty.org...... http://listverse.com...... http://thinkprogress.org...... http://www.bjs.gov...... http://www.crimeinamerica.net......