Originally Posted by frazod
"Morally reprehensible" for the state to cause death? Are you ****ing kidding me? I wonder how many millions of innocents have died in the name of United States of America over the centuries. Personally, I think it's morally reprehensible to keep these ****ing vermin alive, and even more morlally reprehensible that MY TAX DOLLARS ****ING PAY FOR IT.
As for can't undo death part, you also can't undo people getting set free who are guilty as hell because there wasn't enough evidence to convict them or because their prosecutors sucked or the defense team was masterful, so I call that a wash.
And we are awash in criminal scum right now. Our prisons are overcrowded, or streets are overrun, our criminal justice system is a sick, pathetic joke. Apparently you just want to pat these turds on the head and say hey, don't gun down any more honor students, that's not nice. Oh, and no more guns, K?
We should be hanging these mother****ers 100 at a time out in front of God and everybody.
I note that I'm not anti-death penalty. Even 15-20 years ago, when I was much more liberal than I am now, I was at best wishy-washy on it. Now I'm definitely pro death.
Note that England had something like 100 separate death penalty offenses back about 100 years ago and it didn't dramatically deter crime. The simple fact is that the death penalty isn't really all that great a deterrent. No criminal really says to themselves "welp, if I do this crime then I'd get life in jail without parole so that's ok, but this other crime over here is death penalty and no way, **** that!!"
It's just not really a thought process that criminals seem to go through. They all tend to assume they won't get caught anyway, so the punishment doesn't really matter much in terms of deterrence, with ONE exception -- prisoners already in jail for life. A prisoner facing multiple life sentences is harder to control since you can't really do anything more to him. In a death penalty state, however....