yup, Ginny. the statistics on exonerations post execution in the era of DNA evidence is....gut wrenching.

I can think of a few things that warrant it. In my view, like a dog with rabies, some people can't be rehabilitated. I'm thinking serial murderers for example.

Son of Sam is friendly now.

Sorry, but I disagree. You don't rape a child and get to live for free behind bars, protected. But I agree with your 2nd statement...

Elim Garak - What is your alternative to the death penalty for murderers? Would you like to be the one who pays to keep all of the serial murderers alive in jail for their natural lifespans, then?

It actually costs more to execute them.

well, the appeals process is the cost, but, yes

Also, there's no reversing death. So, if years later the person is found to not have committed the crime for which they were executed, you can not bring them back to life. Given that no one and no system is perfect, the death penalty is cruel an unusual punishment. That said, I have no problem with putting human traffickers and serial child molesters to death.

Hiya Lakota Wolf! one of the biggest problems with death penalties is they cost the state more to go through appeals than to incarcerate someone for their lifespan. (i take zero issue with the appeals process as it is one of the few parts of capital punishment that reflect the system working correctly).

On the whole. Statistically speaking, approximately 4% to 6% of the folks in US prisons waiting to be killed are innocent, in spite of the appeals system and the case being closely analyzed before every appeal by defense attorneys. BTW, attorneys who practice capital law defending convicts on death row usually only last 2 to 4 years before they leave that type of practice. It's extremely specialized and emotionally exhausting because you watch so many of your clients being killed.

I wouldn't.

Lakota Wolf - Many murderers were willing to have someone die just to put a few extra dollars in their pockets. Is your philosophy really any different?

Not only does it cost more to execute than keep in prison, there is also no way to correct things when the conviction was wrong to start with. There have been to many overturned convictions after the execution for it to be a good idea.

It actually costs more to perform lethal injection than it does to house and feed a prisoner for the rest of their life

Lakota Wolf: Cheaper to keep them alive. Google it.

Well, if they're dead, they can't repeat the crimes they were doing. j/s This of course for the multiple repeat offenders.

They can't repeat their crimes while imprisoned, either. At least not against the general public and the purpose of imprisonment in the US is for the protection of the public - it isn't intended to be rehabilitative.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

In America, I'd take death row over 1 year in Gen-pop

Ah ok, thanks!