Quote:
Originally Posted by DiamondDave  1) I am all for DNA testing in cases where there actually is evidence, one way or another, that sways in the balance between guilt and innocence
2) When do the appeals stop? What test next? There is a point where everything is exhausted, but our system of seemingly endless appeals keeps death row scum alive longer than the families of victims
3) I am all for the death penalty. Once fried or skewered or injected or gassed or shot or hung or whatever, the repeat crime rate of that person is exactly 0%. A sane society eliminates it's maniacal killers |
If the state is going to take a man's life for a crime -- the ultimate price of mortal men and there are no do-overs -- then the state needs to exhaust EVERY means to ensure there is no mistake.
I get frustrated with the appeals process too, but fixing THAT makes more sense and is more morally acceptable to me than executing innocent people.
Imagine how that must feel. KNOWING you did not commit a crime and watching them execute you and nothing you can say is going to stop it. When that can come down to how good a lawyer you can get, the system's broken.
People get caught up too much in the moral argument as the problem without looking at actual cause and effect. We have the death penalty. We use the death penalty. Is our application of the death penalty foolproof?
Not even close. Fix what's broken first. THEN argue your morals.