Affirmative Case: November/December 1998

"For the first time in 15 months I am happy, but its not over. None of us will be satisfied until he is put to death. He destroyed my life, my family's life, my girlfriend's life, my brother's life. This involved literally thousands of people whose lives have been shattered, not just my brother's alone... To leave Mr. Gacy with a prison sentence is not enough." This is what Kenneth Priest once said about Gacy. Kenneth Priest's brother was one of Gacy's victims. Gacy sexually assulted and murdered 33 young boys and in doing so he shattered many people's lives. It is examples such as this why I stand Resolved: Capital Punishment is Justified.

To make sure the resolution is clear I offer the following definitions taken from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.
*capital punishment- the infliction of the death penalty for the commission of certain crimes.
*justified- to demonstrate to prove to be just, right, or valid.

The value that I will uphold in today's round is that of sociatal good. Sociatal good is what is best for the people in a society. Some things that are good or best for society are feeling safe and secure, having less crime, and having justice.

The best criteria for weighing the values in this round is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the greatest good for the greatest number. When we uphold the resolution we have less crime, justice, and a greater feeling of security. All of these are the greatest good for society compared to a few murders losing their lives and not having them.

I will uphold the resolution with three contentions: the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime, promotes justice in society, and would enhance security in society.

Let's first direct our attention to CONTENTION ONE: THE DEATH PENALTY IS AN EFFECTIVE DETERRENT TO CRIME.
It has been proven to be a deterrent in many ways. When the death penalty is not used crime goes up. According to M. Stanton Evans, author of Human Events once wrote "As long as capital punishment was viewed as a realistic prospect by violent criminals, the homicide rate in this country was relatively low, and falling. But as capital punishment was phased down and at last abolished in the 1960's, the homicide rate turned around and began moving rapidly upward." It also serves as a warning to prospective killers. As Montaigne once said "We do not aim to correct the man we hang; we correct and warn others by him." By doing this we instill fear in these could-be-killers because if they see that others are being severly punished for violent crimes, they would know that if they do the same thing they will be punished in a similar matter and would be afraid it could happen to them. Because the death penalty is final it would be greatly feared. As Robert E. Crowe, an Illinois state attorney once said, "It is the finality of the death penalty which instills fear in the heart of every murderer, and it is this fear of punishment which protects society. If nothing else though the death penalty effectively elliminates the possibility of a repeat crime. For example, if a serial killer is caught and put to death, there is no chance that he could get out on parole and kill more people. To not put a serial killer to death would not be justice which brings me to to

CONTENTION TWO: THE DEATH PENALTY PROMOTES JUSTICE IN SOCIETY.
Webster's Dictionary defines justice as the quality of being just, equity(fairness), merited reward or punishment. The death penalty would provide justice for the victim and close family as well as society. First, it would provide justice for the victim and their family. It is not fair that some body can kill someone else and get away with it. For example, if Bill kills Mark, Mark is dead and his family is grief stricken and will live with that pain for the rest of their lives. Bill on the other hand just gets 20 years in jail. Is it fair that Bill lives while Mark is still dead? If we do this only the murderers lives will be guaranteed. David Bender once wrote in Criminal Justice "If capital punishment is abolished the law will guarantee the lives of none but the murderers." That would not be justice if society is in danger of losing their lives while the murderers who have taken lives away are allowed to live. Also, capital punishment provides justice for the community because crimes are not committed just against a victim but also against society. Why should society have to put up with murderers taking the lives of people in the community and allowing them to live at their expense. David Bender also wrote "It would not be for the interests of humanity that the well-conducted and useful members of the communtiy should be exposed to deprivation of life by murder in order that the lives of murderers may be saved." Should people have worry about murderers getting out and taking more lives which brings me to

CONTENTION THREE: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT WOULD ENHANCE SECURITY IN SOCIETY.
People are worried that murderers will kill again. For example, if you are in a town where a murderer has gotten out on parole recently, and the homicide rate is rising chances are you would be afraid for your safety when leaving your home. People should not have to live with this sense of fear. Michael Kronenwetter, author of Capital Punishment: A Reference Handbook , once wrote "One of the most elemental concerns people have have about those who have already committed terrible crimes is the fear that they will commit more of them. People know that most murderers who are not executed eventually get out of prison, and they believe that these released killers are likely to kill again." There is no such thing as life without parole because a president or governor can always pardon them or have them let out due to overcrowding. Unless we want these murderers on our streets the only sensible answer is capital punishment.

In conclusion, capital punishment is justified. I have shown this through my three contentions which were the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime, capital punishment promotes justice in society, and would enhance security in society. Because of these reasons I would have to agree with William R. Cannon a bishop for the United Methodist Church when he said "It is better by far that a murderer be executed than that still another person in the future be victimized by his crime."

I am now open for Cross Examination.