The death penalty is wrong.

By the same rationale you could ban all motor vehicle transportaion, because that would definitely save the lives of numerous people from car accidents. So, it seems that even in western society keeping human life isn't the supreme value of society.

The death penalty is wrong.

Why not? Let's say the murderer is an exceptional physician that can save the life of 1000 sick babies. Are you so not sure that society wouldn't see it as a repayment?

The death penalty is wrong.

So the obvious solution is not to keep them on death row but rather summarily execute them at the end of the trial.

The death penalty is wrong.

Sometimes, death penalty is not nearly enough. For example, I think that Hitler deserves a much harsher punishment, like chopping off his limbs and injecting him with pain-causing drugs for the rest of his life. For other sinister crimes I would suggest a slow torturing death, cruel and unusual.

The death penalty is wrong.

Cost is an important component of any responisble public policy debate. Money doesn't fall from trees, this is the working men's tax payments that are collected from them against their will with the use of force by the government.

The death penalty is wrong.

This is a ridiculous claim. At best, it proves that current US death penalty implementation is corrupt. There are many other countries, at the past and present, that implemented the death penarly in an extremely cheap ways.

The death penalty is wrong.

Who say's it's detrimental? How many people would like to ressurect from the dead 1000 convicted murderers and rapists? I suspect that not many.

The death penalty is wrong.

Maybe it's ineffective because it's so scarce? Maybe if every convicted murderer would have been executed in 24 hours the deterrence would be much more evident?

The death penalty is wrong.

That does not prove death penalty is wrong. The question is what are the benefits in the alternatives. Let say you bring back to life 1000 convicted murderers and rapists, let even say that 100 of them are innocent, that does not mean that those other 900 won't cause catastrophic damage to society.
1 supporter.

The death penalty is wrong.

Restricing the freedom of proved criminals prevents them from harming people. Unlike the death penalty, life imprisonment is not 100% proof, with known cases of inmates escaping and getting early release and then committing crimes again.

The death penalty is wrong.

All persons die, and indeed some them get exhonorated many years after their death. So no one has that right, simply because life isn't eternal.

We do not have free will since everything that happens is determined by what has happened before.

In such a case you have to apply ockham's razor, which result in Superdeterminism which is, in my view, a much simpler and intuitive concept than Indeterminism.

You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make

This is a misleading analogy, because it assumes there are no other options to save those people, which in reality in those situations there are, unlike presumably the moral dilemma that started this thread.

You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make

But the question is, I assume, CETERIS PARIBUS, meaning all other things held equal, so all those people are equal in any possible thing you can think about. And even if not, you still have to make a choise based on incomplete information. Would you rather flip a coin? I doubt it.

You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make

You don't have a choice. Either 1 or 3 people will die due to your actions (including in action), you have to choose.

You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make

Interesting but irrelevant to the original question.

You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make

That wasn't the question. You don't have the choice to abstain. Either 1 or 3 people will die, depending on your action (including inaction).
2 supporter.

Governments are criminal organizations

Protection racket against other gangs is a classical behavior of a criminal organisation.