Death Penalty

Alot of my friends at school were talking about how it isnt fair that in jail some people get the death penalty and are mad at me because im for it. And i am for this type of action. Some of my friends think that it is cruel and mean but truely i think that it is a great idea. Say you are in jail for killing twelve people, do you really expect to just get a life sentecne? I mean it is one thing to steal something or not paying taxes but taking somebodys life and expect to get away with it is just nuts! So they asked me to put this subject on here and see what people say about it.

I thank my opponent for posting such an interesting topic.

I will assume that the first round is acceptance, and give my opponent the first speech.

My opponent has forfeited the round. However i will still give my arguments.

In this round, my burden will be that the Death penalty is not an acceptable form of punishment, and i must provide an alternate solution. My solution for the round will be simple. A life sentence. Although this is already implemented. I believe that it should always be picked over the death penalty. I will provide 3 key arguments in regards to this alternative.

C1: Death penalty does not provide an adequate punishment for the crime(s) a criminal has committed. The death penalty offers an easy way out. We must weigh the punishment with the act committed. If someone takes the life of someone else or multiple people, is it less of a punishment to kill them off immediately. You only end all of their stress, and worries. By giving a convict the death penalty, you give them the proper punishment for the heinous crime that the convict has committed. It is much harder on the convict and a much more suitable compensation to give them a life sentence.

C2: The death penalties expense is costly to the US economy.

Samson in 09 continues
The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated.

If the death penalty was replaced with a sentence of Life Without the Possibility of Parole*, which costs millions less and also ensures that the public is protected while eliminating the risk of an irreversible mistake, the money saved could be spent on programs that actually improve the communities in which we live. The millions of dollars in savings could be spent on: education, roads, police officers and public safety programs, after-school programs, drug and alcohol treatment, child abuse prevention programs, mental health services, and services for crime victims and their families.

Required Burden
Since my opponent forfeited the round there was no burden of proof met or even stated. Since the Pro has simply not made an argument, the round should automatically go to the con.

http://www.deathpenalty.org...

My opponent has forfeited the entire debate. I am pretty sure i don't have to explain why i won.

Umm....Vote for Con.