Quote:
Originally posted by Yayayah
Id be of the opinion that if it is proven that a person committed a mass murder or when sentenced had around 50+ convictions to their name, then death penalty is appropriate. Where there is anything less, no, jail and possible rehabilitation are the way to go.
|
That's the thing with the death penalty, it doesn't work like that. Sure, we'll kill someone who's killed 5 people today. Tomorrow we'll change legislation so that we kill someone who's only killed 4 people. The day after that... 1 person. This will continue until we find ourselves killing people that can be reabilitated.
Now I believe, just like 99% of people out there that some felons deserve to die. Those that kill in cold blood or rape (or both) should be given the death penalty, but our system just isn't perfect enough to ensure that innocent people get through the system. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. If we kill 200 of the most dispicable people who commit the most heneous crimes, then kill one innocent person, it's hasn't been worth it...
@Ashton: "what are the chances" you say... very little, but they're there, and thats enough. It WILL happen one day, and what will you do if it's your son? Accept it as a small price to pay? I don't think so...
@Nisses: "This is a very likely way to discourage these types of crimes". This has been proven to be false so many times. If capital punishment is such a great deterent, why is the murder rate the highest in the only western country that has the death penalty?