The United States should retain the use of the death penalty

Here's too a good debate. Nice avatar choice for you too. Meddle is a great one of Pink Floyds albums. Let's get started now, shall we? Basic overview of what I will be arguing:-That the death penalty is an extreme, and unnecessary risk, in that innocent people have been executed numerous times. -That the death penalty violates the right to life, is inhumane and barbaric. -That America need to abolish the death penalty in order to progress as a society. -That the death penalty eliminates the possibility of reforming or rehabilitating a criminal. -That the death penalty is an unnecessary burden on the tax payers, as in that it costs more than life in imprisonment. -That life imprisonment is a far better, more just, and less risky form of punishment. Arguments: C.1 As long as the death penalty is in use, there is always the risk of killing innocents:There is always the chance that the person being convicted is innocent. Even when there is what seems strong evidence, it may only mean that the convicted man had something too do with the crime, not the murder itself. There are of course many other possible explanations why someone, tried guilty, might be innocent. Those sentenced to life imprisonment have the chance to be proven innocent before they die. Well over eighty people in the past quarter century have been condemned but then released before execution. [1]This source shows detailed accounts of eleven innocents being executed. [2] One researcher says he has found at least 74 cases in which wrongful executions have most likely taken place. [2]69 inmates on death row have been released since 1973 (Source is from 1997 so it would be allot higher now). [3] This clearly shows the risks of the DP. Risks which are completely unnecessary and should be gotten rid of immediately. These men were lucky to escape with their lives. I should add that there have, undoubtedly, been cases in which innocent people have been executed but have not been proved innocent afterwards. After being executed there is not much need for someone to try too prove the innocence of someone who is already dead. So there are undoubtedly instances in the past where we have executed an innocent man but did not know so, and still do not know. With life imprisonment there is zero chance of killing an innocent man. It is a horrible thing for an innocent person to be killed at the hands of the state. It is also completely unnecessary. C.2 The death penalty is barbaric form of punishment that needs to be abolished in order for the United states to progress as a society. Now of course the one being condemned has violated anther's right to life, but does that mean he loses his right to life as well? When one man takes away someone else right, it does not mean that man taking away the right should also have his rights taken away. It is the same concept as an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth. For one thing it teaches revenge and is wrong. In order to progress as a society we need to get rid of this barbaric punishment. The eighth amendment of the Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. What else would you call purposefully taking the life of another human being? A decent and humane society does not deliberately kill human beings. The death penalty is extremely hypocritical. How can we teach something is wrong by doing the exact same thing that we are teaching is wrong? Basically it's a you kill him so we kill you idea, which is a barbaric and an absurd way of thinking. This is what makes the death penalty so ironic. C.3 Those executed cannot be be reformed, or rehabilitated. What is the purpose of taking action against criminals? 1. The main purpose is too punish them. 2. Keeping them segregated from society is another purpose. 3. Another purpose is to rehabilitate or reform them. With the use of life imprisonment we have the chance of accomplishing all three of these. However with the use of capital punishment the third is impossible, unless they are reformed before they are executed. But it is much more likely they would be reformed if they have their whole life to be reformed. Thus life imprisonment obviously accomplishes the third goal much better than the death penalty. The death penalty deprives criminals of a second chance which SHOULD be given to them. The question is, why would we be using a form of punishment that only accomplishes two of the three main purposes of taking action against criminals, when there is another option that may accomplish all three? With life imprisonment those convicted have a much better chance of repenting, and after repentance have a much longer time too do good works. Two murderers, Van Houten and Krenwinkel, were sentenced to life imprisonment, but latter expressed remorse at their actions. [7] If they had been sentenced to death they would never have had the chance to repent. Watson and Atkins, two other murderers, became Christian Fundamentalists after being given a life sentence. [7] With the use of the death penalty the State is not accomplishing what it is supposed too. This argument may appeal to any human being, but it may appeal even stronger to those that are religious. C.4 Death Penalty costs more: While it may not seem so at first, the death penalty is much more expensive than life imprisonment. This is due to the fact that the constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for cases of capital punishment. -By replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment, California could save $1 billion over five years. -Californian taxpayers have to pay 90,000 more on those waiting to be executed per year than on normal prisoners. -The source also says that, "The federal court system spends approximately $12 million on defending death row inmates in federal court. " [4] Those serving life sentences are also able to help pay off their costs by working while those executed obviously cannot, being dead. Conclusion: The death penalty is an inhumane and hypocritical punishment that devalues life. It is extremely risky as there is always the chance that we are killing an innocent man. It is a waste of the taxpayers money and eliminates the possibility of reforming criminals. Over all life imprisonment is a far better, more just, and less risky form of punishment. Thank you pro, for accepting this debate, and good luck in the future rounds. Sources:[1] . http://www.the-slammer.org...... [2] . http://www.justicedenied.org......[3] . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...... [4] . http://www.deathpenalty.org......[5] . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...... [6] . http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org...... [7] . http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu...[8] . http://www.vincenter.org...