Having said all that, some people do such horrendous things that they deserve to be eliminated from the face of the earth. I'm generally not for killing but why keep them around at the expense of society when they are such a danger,

@PalacinkyPDX What good are statistics when these states are not utilizing the death penalty. If the state wants to be taken seriously about having the death penalty then it needs to be enforced. If you kill someone (not in self defense) or rape girls or molest children it should be mandatory!!!! Set the standard and show that the law will be enforced. The prisons are full of people who are on death row and deserve to be removed from the gene pool. What are they waiting for??. It needs to be used, and why not make it a TV event. Or a "pay per view" event. Let parents choose to sit their kids down and show them the penalty of being a gang banger or a child molester. Saying a thing is different than DOING a thing.

I agree with you on principal(there are some people who just don't need to live), but I've lost my faith in the justice systems ability to tell if this is the case. There was a case in North Carolina where a man was on death row for years, before a lawyer figured out he was in jail at the time of the murder. It turned out the witnesses were the actual perpetrators. There are days where I think stupidity should be lethal, but... ya... no

I can't find a reference for that story so log it as an unsubstantiated anecdote, I did find the following link. [deathpenaltyinfo.org]

I'm also colored by my one time I was called for jury duty. The judge thanked us for our time and explained how by being their we were giving the legal system the leverage they needed to force a plee agreement. I was appalled. I've been in jail more than once and I always felt the jury should be the last chance for justice. I can only imagine the prosecutor being able to threaten a persons life on the chance a jury doesn't believe him. In the face of hopelessness I can see the innocent falling prey to fear.

I agree with you on the frustration of paying prisoners way; I think it is far worse to execute the innocent, and I would argue even once is too many. So until they come up with a full proof way to gauge innocents, and curb the ambitions of over zealous law enforcement I will forever vote against the death penalty.

@PalacinkyPDX There is zero proof that lighthouses stop boats from colliding but we still have and build them. Nice try. You can't prove the deterrent because no one says I didnt kill him because I would get the death penalty. Apparently you don't care that inmates can do whatever they want in prison, because you don't have a relative that is a guard. Yes there is a slim chance that someone might be wrongly convicted of murder, want me to get the stats for you? You can use that and pay to house them for life and commit random crimes--your choice of course. That's why there's chocolate and vanilla ice cream.

@Clupus When the judge said that to the jury, perhaps in an inarticulate way, they were explaining the situation where a defendant who is guilty and was about to face a much greater penalty if convicted at trial, realized that time to decide was up and decided to take the plea. People charged with crimes are probably guilty in the high 90 percentile. Yes, nothing is perfect. To take your argument out further, we should have no justice system since we have no 100% guarantee of guilt. A belief you are certainly allowed to have. With our appellate system the chances of a murderer being wrongly convicted are minuscule. If you're ok with inmates killing anyone they want with impunity, that's ok too--just not a system I want to live with.

@PalacinkyPDX The proof is the person was convicted of a capital offense. The penalty for some crimes is death, they knew it before they did it. If you seriously believe that to have no punishment for inmates sentenced to life in prison for killing anyone in prison is better than having some punishment that might be a deterrent, we live in different worlds. Based on your logic we should have no laws because we can't prove that the punishments are a deterrent at all. Roll that world over in your head. By the way, the biggest deterrent of the death penalty is that person won't kill anyone else.

@PalacinkyPDX more fun when you get to declare it over isnt it Ms. Trump You get to ignore all the questions that way. Pretty sure there's proof that people given the death penalty don't kill anymore. But if you believe that there's no proof on either side therefore you must be right, you should have just declared after your first comment that you are right and I wouldnt have wasted the time.

@lerlo I fail to see how my argument could be stretched from "The justice system should not have the option of the death penalty because it has in the past executed innocent citizens" to "because the justice system is not perfect we should just have no justice system at all". We are not debating extremes, we are debating where is the line. I say that one mistake is too many, where as I think you are arguing that there is a number of mistakes where the benefits of the death penalty are warranted. I'm curious where you would suggest that number is, and if you accept the risk of being in that number?

@Clupus my point was if the issue is that mistakes are made in the justice system then we shouldn't have any because someone might be wrongly convicted. What you're implying is you just don't want anyone killed by mistake but being in prison for life is okay if there's a mistake. Or any lesser sentence. I'm suggesting that with the low incidence of mistakes being made and the multiple layers of appellate assistance, I would rather have a deterrent for inmates who can kill guards and other prisoners at will with no sanction. Please show me where I said it's okay if someone is mistakenly killed. I would venture to Guess that more life sentence inmates commit murders than there are murderers wrongly convicted who are on death row.

@lerlo
I acknowledge the need for a system and any system that is made and runs by people is going to be flawed. I'm stating that In my opinion the death penalty should not be an option because of the demonstration of mistakes. I'm more ok with an innocent being locked up for life, because there is the possibility of the justice system being able to correct the mistake. When the person is executed that possibility is lost, and the state has blood on it's hands, and by extension so do we all.

I agree that the prison conditions are terrible currently, and I'm not qualified to argue about them. I'm not unsympathetic to the plight of guards and prisoners, but when they take your life it is a crime. When the justice system takes an innocent life, I would argue it is a betrayal of the very purpose of it's existence.

I never said you said it's OK if someone is mistakenly killed. I don't think for a second you are a monster or a evil human being. I said that the fact you acknowledge mistakes happen and still support the death penalty implies you believe that it is an acceptable risk for the benefits. Is this an incorrect statement? If it is not, I accept and respect your position though I may disagree with it. I have no doubt that if you knew how to fix the system you would do it in a heart beat, as would I. I believe that you spent your 20 years trying to do the best job you could for the innocent, and for that I thank you.

I would submit that having the discussions like this one is the only way the system will get fixed.

@Clupus I just equate an innocent life being taken when a person is wrongly convicted to an innocent life of a prison guard just doing their job or an inmate just doing their time who can be killed with no ramifications by a person given a life sentence. All are innocents. Although there is a bad joke about convicting the guilty is easy, convicting the innocent is the had part, the job of a prosecutor is to do justice, not to convict and I didn't prosecute innocent people. Unfortunately this conversation is between the wrong people. I'm not sure that even with the problems of eye witness identification that the system can be "fixed" but things like DNA and body cams and the whole world having cameras on their cell phones can't hurt to at least add evidence that didn't previously exist. Most people don't commit capital offense in front of other people, so circumstantial evidence is used and unfortunately some people have a wrongly held bias against circumstantial evidence and many guilty people go free because of it. I could give some prime examples, O.J. the woman who killed her child in Florida etc.

@lerlo This was on last night. Good timing

@Clupus yes, as I said, because there are bad prosecutors, and people who plead guilty out if fear, we should have no justice system, regardless of the percentages, so that no one may be harmed, until someone develops a perfect system. Come to think of it there should be no driving,, airplane flights or bars until someone comes up with a way that no one can be killed as a result of them

@lerlo And we should outlaw using anything flammable to protect firefighters.

I think all prisoners should have access to end of life meds.

I agree, the death penalty as a concept against the odd case of real, heinous white guys isnt the problem. It’s the fact that our government can't be trusted to be in charge of it. People of color are being exhonorated 10, 15, 20 years after the fact for crimes they didnt commit and were framed and wrongly imprisoned for. Sure if you rape and/or murder or cause any heinous crime intentionally to someone and there are multiple witnesses, otherwise airtight video and DNA evidence, no police tampering, Im fine with it. But the way our justice system disproportionately effects minorities and evidence is planted to catch nonviolent drug offenders, I don't trust our government any farther than I can spit.

If they were in a habit of going after the real crimes against humanity: the bought off politicians and the bankers/NRA lobbyists who own them, the prison industrial complex slave owners and military contractors who get paid to blow things up and rebuild them... sure, publicly crucify em at halftime every Sunday. if we were getting rid of their ilk Id be all for it. But no they call the shots. As it is, it seems far more likely for a framed or circumstantially unlucky poor person of color to be executed than it is for a rich white war criminal to be. Thats not the kind of power our government should be able to wield over its own citizens, but considering what we’re doing to the children of our neighbors, it’s not super surprising.

Exactly. What is the point keeping assholes alive who are guilty beyond all possible doubt? I resent being taxed to pay for them. They should be subjected to scientific study first alive...and then dead.

Charles Manson is dead

@Woodron true...but he did come up for parole for well over a Decade while alive.........

The death should be by nitrogen asphyxiation. Painless and easily administered.
[en.wikipedia.org]

Interesting point.

@PalacinkyPDX
The state does NOT own my life. It is mine to retain or dispose of as I see fit.

@PBuck0145 That's what YOU think.