In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitation

1. Felony List Defense" For a retributive system, all crimes must be punished. Since he’s restricting himself to his list of crimes, he’s rendering his argument irrelevant." The above is a falsehood that my opponent is attempting to pass off as truth. At no point did I agree that all crimes would have to be punished equally under the system of increased punishment I propose. Therefore, limitations are to be imposed at my leisure. Meaning that I would not see a common skateboarder put to the axe as I would a rapist. 2. Recidivism Rate Defense "But, he says that all criminals should be executed. However, since Yama is limiting himself to only eight crimes, he suggests nothing for fixing the recidivism of all others."The above is another falsehood my opponent is attempting to pass off as truth. My opponent proposes that I have limited myself to eight crimes, while I have limited myself to felonies in general. Of which there are more than twenty."Building on my constructive: if more money were to be put into rehabilitative programs, and prisoners were required to partake in rehabilitative programs: prisoners would be surrounded by an environment designed to better themselves for the future, rather than the current system, which simply them with criminals that can enhance their illegal activity. As I noted, in California, there is no program for rehabilitating convicted sex offenders. With a lack of programs to improve the behavior of criminals, it is predictable that they would repeat their actions. To fix this, an implementation of systems such as the one RSVP used would lower recidivism rates considerably. Such a proposal would be more effective than Yama’s: as he has restricted himself to fixing the recidivism rates of people that committed one of only eight crimes." Here my opponent has made a statement with no evidence to back it. Upon personal research (Google[1]), I hath discovered that there is no research that proves rehabilitiative programs help lower the chances of a sex offender being rearested. Despite interesting priliminary resuslts, the general consensus is that more conclusive and through research into the subject is needed [2]. While I may be arguing that felonies such as rape should be punished with greater severity, I am not so much a monster as to entertain the notion that an innocent life should be put at risk for furthering the research into the minds of the deranged. 3. Defending Morality ArgumentIn defending my case for morality, I will compare the thoughts of two great minds. Both men are right in their own sense. Mahatma Ghandi believed that "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind". Here Ghandi argues that the act of seeking revenge will inevitably lead to the entire world being caught in an endless cycle of revenge. However Niccolo Machiavelli had another take on that same ideal, as stated in chapter seventeen of The Prince "Here a question arises: whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved". Here, Machiavelli argues that the act of sparing a criminal or anyone from the spear of their ruler will inevitably be counter productive for the ruler and ignored; as it should be. Therefore, I see no reason someone should not be able to execute a known criminal if said criminal has commited murder themselves. 1. https://www.google.com...;2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...