Reasonable doubt should be much stricter. Seems like in some cases it is completely ignored. I think if there is any doubt what-so-ever then the death penalty or any penalty should not be allowed until that doubt is erased. Detectives are going to have to work their arses off to find as much evidence as possible.

I don't know what to think about the death penalty. Sometimes I feel that is the best option especially if the crime was especially heinous, but although I feel maybe they should suffer, I say we must follow the Constitution. I also see what countries like Norway do for "punishment" for criminals and supposedly that has a very high success rate, much lower percentage of repeat offenders than here.

I agree that we should go with the cheapest method if it must be done, but also take out the human factor, or what was said before, have another death row inmate do it. It could perhaps be automated or maybe made more entertaining (for some) at the same time by having the inmate sit in a chair with a gun to his head while having to play a game like Flappy Bird and die when the bird dies so in the end the inmate is responsible for his or her own death. I would say that it if the death penalty must be used at a deterrent, public executions would be most effective.

To me the death penalty is too complicated an issue for me to say whether or not I support it.

__________________
Current: 1975 450SEL, 83 300D, 88 Yugo GVX, 90 300D OM603 swap, 91 F150 4.6 4v swap, 93 190E Sportline LE 3.0L M104 swap, 93 190E Sportline LE Megasquirt, 03 Sprinter, 06 E500 4Matic wagon.