Life without parole is more ethical option than capital punishment.

Before I refute my opponent's arguments, I will state mine. One of my main arguments is for utilitarianism. Utilitarianism, by definition of the Merriam Webster dictionary, is the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the greatest number of people [1]. The way that the death penalty would help the greatest number of people, is because there would be no chance by any means that the criminal would be able to get out of jail. Not just escaping, but they can bribe people, or legally sent out, which I will state later. "George Rivas, 30, inmate number 702267, serving 99 years for the crimes of aggravated kidnapping and burglary that he had committed in El Paso, was tired of life behind prison walls. Although he had attained trustee status and worked in the prison's maintenance department, considered one of the best duty assignments in the prison, he had become disillusioned with the grim prospect of never walking the streets a free man again and spending his nights confined to an austere eight foot by eight foot cell equipped with only a bunk, a wash basin, and a toilet. He was sick of the lousy food that was typically served in the prison's mess hall, and he was tired of hearing the metal doors slide shut when returned to his cell at lockdown." [2] As the quote states, George Rivas was serving a sentence that would most likely last his whole lifetime. "... was tired of life behind prison walls..." Criminals who know they have a long time ahead of them until they can get out will try to get out by any means necessary. "Rivas had been making plans for some time, along with six other inmates, to do something about it, and he had decided that this was the day to carry out his plans." [3] While making the group, later called the Texas 7, they thought of plans to escape the prison bars. "Earlier, Rivas and his gang had convinced Patrick Moczygemba, a maintenance supervisor, to allow them to remain behind to wax and seal the maintenance department's floors." [2] As stated before, criminals can bribe members of the prison staff. By doing this they can escape the prison, which will endanger society as a whole. By leaving murderers, burglars, and pedaphiles out in the open, it would put people of any social class in danger. Also as stated before, being ethical is what is morally right. By defending life without parole over the death sentence my opponent is saying that letting criminals roam free would be morally right. "On July 27, 2013, 1,000 inmates escaped from the Queyfiya prison near Benghazi, Libya. The escape occurred after a wave of political assassinations and attacks on political offices around the country. Local residents of Benghazi forced the inmates out of the prison." [4] A mass escape from prison would leave the whole community and city in danger, because more criminals would be on the loose. The facts shown are about people who were not eligible for the capital punishment. If someone were to be, but not receive it, the community would be in much more danger. By enforcing the capital punishment, I would be valuing utilitarianism because it would be protecting the entire community from dangerous criminals. I will extend my arguments and refute my opponent's next round.[1]http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.trutv.com...[3] http://tinyurl.com...[3]http://en.wikipedia.org...