Allright, this is fun. When I take a minority position I'd be up until midnight addressing every single post line for line. So I read the posts and comment on them in a general sense. I am thankful for everyone's respectful tone, and even apologize that I took some swipes in some of my replies. While it is true that if you look at our executions on a global basis, we do compare with Iran, Iraq, China, and Saudi Arabia, it is not fair of me to put that label on death penalty supporters. It is a fair point and the statistics don't lie, but I should not be acting like the writer of a negative campaign ad and equating someone with that.
There is a consensus that when one has committed murder - and the evidence is clear that's the person who did it - that there is no conceivable way of entering the human community or that the restitution should equal the crime - thus that warrants the death penalty.
To that I still disagree and I am thankful that we can respectfully disagree.
Motive has to be established. I am not talking about some candy-ass treatment of someone's socioeconomic status. I am not talking about 'he came from a poor home' and didn't know better.
I am talking about establishing why what was done was done. Did the perp have a mental condition, and insanity is not always a mere legal technicality.
I would almost support the death penalty in cases where it was pre-meditated and it took some thinking and arranging to pull it off. But if someone is bipolar or schizophrenic or has been proven to have mental retardation or be out of his or her mind, then that's a different situation where one was unable to differentiate what was going on.
Why would I almost agree with it? Because I have lost patience with thugs and killers myself.
But the bigger question for me is - what good does it do for the victim? To me, I still see none. I see nothing in the process of healing.
Then there is a general agreement that the death penalty system is not evenhanded and it takes out innocent people, and many do not believe that it's a discriminatory practice, but I didn't invent those facts. Some killers have better access than others to good defense.
Sometimes hardened mafia thugs will get off if they turn in the boss, while less connected killers end up frying.
Then some posters acknowledge those defects in the system, but still have not mentioned anything about halting the death penalty until it can be applied more evenly or in your words 'more justly' (because in my words it is never just.) Thank God Illinois has had the moratorium for that reason.
You all seem to share the outrage over the cost of the death penalty - but yet, that's the reality of this unjust system of today. It's not applied evenly and it's not effecient and I argue there IS ZERO DETERRANT EFFECT to the death penalty.