Death Penalty

I will start by refuting more things from round 2 before refuting his round 3 rebuttals. ==Rc3: Death Penalty is Moral! ==I see you took that quote from this website [1] which has an easy rebuttal to it. "Embracing a certain quotient of racial bias and discrimination against the poor is an inexorable aspect of supporting capital punishment. This is an immoral condition that makes rejecting the death penalty on moral grounds not only defensible but necessary for those who refuse to accept unequal or unjust administration of punishment. " Bryan Stevenson, JD. 2004. We do not destroy garbage. We toss it into the landfill to rot away, which is exactly the case of LWOP! When a dog bites a child, we do not kill him, just punish him. If a human kills another human being, they still have the right to live. This is actually shown by your two examples (garbage and dogs. ) Their quality of life should drastically be taken away, but we do not possess the right to take away another man's life, no matter the crime. ==Rc4: Overpopulation==This case is not a good case. Only 14 people have been put to death in 2014 [2]. This poses absolutely no effect to the jail population. In fact, if we only save 11 million dollars by abolishing the death penalty, we could build a new jail to house all of the people who would've been executed. If the death penalty is banned, microscopic to no effect would be seen. No murderer would be released in LWOP. There is a very, very, very small to no chance that this would ever happen, so we shouldn't take the chance. I have disproved in rounds 2 and 3:The death penalty deters murders more than LWOPThe death penalty is not morally justifiedRemoving the death penalty would have negative effects. Now, on to my round 3 rebuttals. ==R1==My opponent states that we should just do it with a firing squad and have people donate guns to kill them. If this was really a smart idea, why is it not put into effect yet? We do not hang citizens or use the electric chair because it is unconstitutional. The Constitution states that no cruel or unusual punishment shall be used and that people should have right of choice. Thus, we go with the less cruel way of lethal injection and giving them the choice between lethal injection or electrocution. I have taken into account how much it takes to feed someone for life in my examples. The studies take everything into account from cost of execution to cost of feeding an inmate. My opponent states we can shorten the trials, but how? We need to make sure that the evidence is absolute, and that takes a long time. When we shorten the trials, we further add risk to executing someone innocent. ==R2==My opponent states that the survey was taken on citizens who have not studied the death penalty. He obviously did not read it. They were taken from experts with reasoning available [3]. He also says I fail to understand the variety of states. then he shows us a graph that IS FOR MY SIDE. Even if all of the non-death penalty states are small states, what does it matter? It does not name the TOTAL murder rate, only the murder rate per 100,000, so the data is not biased. Gun control is ineffective. If the death penalty is a big, solid deterrent like you state, then guns should not have to play a role in murders, as people would be scared enough of the death penalty. You show me this is obviously not the case, which just further goes against you. Minnesota and Texas are both big states, so they are comparable. Minnesota having less crime further adds to my case of the LWOP being effective. As for the countries, refer to my states argument. If the death penalty is a big deterrent, the circumstances should not matter because people would be too scared of the death penalty to even think about committing a murder. LWOP shows less of this than the death penalty does. Thus, your rebuttal is easily turned into an argument for my side. ==R3==The burning of DNA was NOT an error. Please show me evidence stating it was an error. If the U. S got it wrong, this further shows problems with the death penalty. It shows the wide margin of error. If it an "easily be fixed," why hasn't the U. S. A taken courses of actions to properly fix it? If there are problems with the police and judges on the trial, then this further shows why the death penalty is bad. You can not have any error for something as serious as death. ==R4==My opponent's statement seems to be somewhat boastly. He states nothing has changed over 5,000 years. He states his 6th grade history book with no specific passages from the book that state this. Murder was NOT the same back then as it is now, as many didn't have a fair trial, DNA was not taken into account, basic laws were not available, etc. ==R5==I admitted the death penalty deters little to no crime. My main point you failed to take into account is that I said the death penalty does not deter as much crime as LWOP. If the death penalty really helped lower murder rates, then why are states without the death penalty lowering also? It seems this is just because law, order, police, and technology are making this so. He fails to notice that the U. S. A murder rate has gone down in the same rate, there being no evidence that the death penalty is responsible for this. When people go to court, they ask for life and not death because they still have the right to life, and they see that. Yolo does not answer my question. If people were scared of death more than anything, they would take any measures to avoid it. If depressed people were so afraid of death, they wouldn't kill themself and try to life a life. If death was really the thing humans are most scared of, they wouldn't join the military to get out of something because they would be less scared of that said "something. "Thank you for reading. I eagerly wait my opponent's response! [1] . http://deathpenalty.procon.org...[2] . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...[3] . http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...