The death penalty should be offered as a form of punishment.

Well first of all I'm afraid my closing statement will not be as long as I was hoping it would be due to time constraints. I'm afraid I conveyed the wrong message when I made the statement about the averages. I would hope I understand the laws of averages by this time(if I don't then I'm in BIG trouble). What I was trying to say was that some of the states that support the death penalty have a far higher murder rate than the majority of states. While looking at the statistics state by state show a far cry from a 40% difference. As to execution being a deterrence I was not referring to crimes of passion or premeditation but rather as it relates to the common criminal. However, I admit that this is more of a personal belief rather than a common fact. Maximum security prisons are all good and well, but that does not solve the main problem...how to guarantee the safety of society. Escapes from maximum security prisons have happened before and continue to happen at a rather disturbing rate considering the security measures imposed. So I have to reject the assumption that this is the ultimate solution. "I don't understand how you can have unyielding faith in our justice system ("") one moment and then be totally incredulous as to its ability to function the next ("in our current justice system ")...At the same time it is NOT 99% effective and to think it is so would be incredibly idealistic. The truth lies somewhere in between. " Once again I'm afraid you misinterpreted what I was saying. I said that DNA testing has been proven to be at least 99% accurate and that the rigorous court proceedings usually eliminates any reasonable doubt from the case - more often than not proving undeniable guilt. I was not contradicting myself when I then said that it is far from uncommon to see these people back on the streets after a few years. The prosecution phase is very thorough and rigorous, but when it comes to sentencing I believe the system is broken and justice is simply not served. "Death is the ultimate verdict which neither the government, nor the people have the right to sentence. If you make the choice to take from someone their most precious gift, their life, then that is murder. It is never ok to take someone's life, no matter the circumstances." Well I'm afraid we will just have to agree to disagree on this. I believe the people have the right to decide whether or not to permanently remove these dangerous individuals from society via execution, and I still maintain that by the decrees of law, reason, and morality we are bound to remove these cancerous infections that plague our society. A friend of mine was murdered by her husband a few years ago while on her honeymoon in a manner most coldblooded, so I feel particular repugnance to the idea that this man still has a right to live after what he has done. Though I wish I had time to more adequately address some of the issues in your closing argument I'm afraid this is the best I can do. However, in closing I wish to applaud my opponent, CharmingAnecdote, for her intelligent and sincere arguments for her cause. She has represented her side very ably and maintained a polite demeanor throughout the debate. I must admit that, being my first debate, I entered into it rather unprepared. GOD BLESS