Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dculkin
Three reasons:
(1) You describe a miniscule fraction of the cases in which the death penalty has been applied.
(2) Those factors pertain to the guilt phase of the trial. They have nothing to do with the penalty phase.
(3) Long, miserable experience has proven that our system has so far been incapable of administering the death penalty in a fair manner. Our capital punishment system is an abomination. If we want to execute people, we should do it in public and we should spend the resources needed to do it right. The reasons that will never happen is that so few people are directly affected by the death penalty, so it is easy for politicians to get the masses to go along with what seems to be emotionally appealing to them.
I say we stick with the Sixth Amendment. It is nice and simple.
|
I agree with KV that our criteria for administering the death penalty requires some reform, and should only apply to cases that are far, FAR beyond reasonable doubt. And I don't think the Petereson case qualifies as that. I figure it will be overturned, and will become a life sentence. I think he is a piece of $h!t, and that he did kill his wife/son, but the prosecution just did not produce enough hard, tangible evidence to warrant the death penalty.
I also agree with YOU concerning public executions. I think they should be attendable, by anyone who wants to attend, and they should also be televised. Pay-per-view, perhaps, to help cover the cost?...
Right now, the death penalty does not serve as a highly effective deterrent (except to the murderer being executed!
), but I think that would drastically change if other "potential murderers" saw what an execution is REALLY like. Seeing is believing.
Mike