|
I support the Death Penalty, and unfortunately, it is unrealistic to have a perfect system. Reading StanT's arguments, I have to agree that it is unfair to kill even one innocent person, but even with DNA testing, innocent people will be put to death. It is a matter of probability; planted evidence, faulty technology, error in judgment of jurors, etc. The best I could hope for is that the number of innocent who die is minimal. That is such an unfair statement, but I truly mean it.
Perhaps the debate also should include the process of appeals. Should long appeal processes and numerous years on death row be considered favorable because it may result in the discovery of new evidence that leads to a fair acquittal? Proponents would argue that the former of the two costs tax dollars. In theory, perhaps the sentence of death shouldn't be made without the 'best' efforts of the judicial system, and thus the need for a long appeal process shouldn't exist. I really don't know, I have never researched the laws or read the thoughts of a death row inmate or family member of a victim. This thread reminded me that I should look into those resources.
|