The United States should retain Capital Punishment for murder.

Thanks f16 (cool name by the way) now I'll do a point by point rebuttal of your case.1) Human rights violation--> No explanation as to how, how is killng someone for a crime committed different than imprisoning them which violates their right to liberty?--> No logical analysis, just the opinion of Amnesty International.--> Even if we accept the Death Penalty to violate human rights, that cannot outweigh the innocent lives saved. 2) Barbaric and Medieval--> Con claims that public support for the Death Penalty is declining--> First, no impact argued, who cares?--> Secondly, this is empirically untrue. Taken from a reliable, impartial source (Gallup polls), support for the Death Penalty has been static (and the vast majority) for the past decade[1]. --> Con argues that an eye for an eye is dangerous. This is pre-emptive of an argument I didn't make. I do not agree that poking the eye out of a person in revenge is the proper penalty, however I am not arguing for revenge. --> The Death Penalty is the only sure-fire way to ensure a killer does not strike again. My arguments are motivated by public safety concerns, not vengeance. 3) Costs more--> No impact argued, so what? --> Justice > Money. A 20 year sentence would be less costly than a life sentence, but not as just. --> Two of the states mentioned (California and Kansas) do not have a true Death Penalty. In the past 35 years Kansas has executed 0 people, and California has executed 13 (with 690+ on "death row"). Clearly when judging the cost of an execution in these states, it would be extremely high, because in California for instance, each man who's executed has around 60 others in his place who are not. I.E. the cost calculation is not an accurate assessment. --> The two states mentioned that DO actually execute, Maryland and Tennessee, the only thing mentioned is the case itself. No one is denying that the up-front costs of the Death Penalty are more than Life, it's the over all costs that are in dispute. (For states that actually execute like Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma, ect.)--> Here's a cost analysis showing that Life Without Parole costs "$1.2 to $3.6 million" more than the Death Penalty if the criminal is actually executed.[2]. (scroll about halfway down, to the cost section)--> This cost analysis ignores the use of the Death Penalty as a tool for Plea Bargaining. The Criminal Justice Legal foundation reports that defendants plead guilty (and get, on average, harsher sentences) 10% more in Death Penalty states than in non-Death Penalty states, avoiding the cost of a trial entirely.[3]4) Innocence--> No examples given, more than likely because no examples exist. --> Outweighed. The Death Penalty saves far more lives than one possible innocent. --> Why can we accept the thousands of innocent people who die yearly in car and airplane crashes for our own selfish convenience, yet we cannot accept a possible innocent dying for something much more selfless like public safety?--> He also falsely asserts that the mentally retarted are executed. The Supreme court ruled in Atkins V. Virginia that this cannot happen.5) Other Options--> He claims life w/o parole to have the same effect. That is false, look at the Allen and Taylor examples in my case. Also the Texas Seven escaped a maximum security prison[4], so life w/o parole is not as effective at keeping innocent life safe than the Death Penalty. 6) Does not help victim --> Con asserts that killing the murderer will not bring back the victim. True, but he hasn't explained how life w/o parole is capable of such a miracle either. If we must abolish the death penalty because it doesn't help the victim, we also ought to abolish all penalties for murder as well, no?--> He also states that it doesn't help the family. He gives no evidence or logical analysis for this. I will. Here's a list of over 350 quotes from families of victims in support of the Death Penalty[5].7) Cruel and Unusual--> Cons logic could also be used to make life w/o parole "cruel and unusual" as well. With the Death Penalty they are spending years waiting for the inevitable (death). With life imprisonment they are also spending years waiting for the inevitable (death) they just spend longer. The Death Penalty is, using my Opponents logic, the more merciful action of the two.--> The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the Death Penalty is not cruel or unusual punishment. --> The vast majority (65%) of Americans disagree with my Opponent and believe that the Death Penalty is a moral action.[6]Conclusion: My Opponents arguments are outweighed and refuted. Please vote Pro. Sources:1. http://www.gallup.com...2. http://www.prodeathpenalty.com...3. http://www.cjlf.org...4. http://en.wikipedia.org...5. http://pro-dp.appspot.com...6. http://www.gallup.com...