In Defense of the Death Penalty – Amelia May Johnson

submitted by [deleted] from theameliamay.cyou

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, innocent people are convicted of crimes they didn’t commit, and a lot of the folks on death row are innocent, but that isn’t an argument against capital punishment, it’s an argument against the system that deals it.

So an admittedly imperfect system should be able to administer the death penalty? What if we apply that to other things, how about a toaster that occasionally gives a lethal shock but that mostly makes fantastic toast? Should we keep using that toaster because we're not against toasters even though that one toaster kills innocent people. It's just a badly implemented toaster but we should still use it anyways????

Btw, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings the other day, that wasn't my intention.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If the toaster is a repeat offender, and a jury of other toasters agree on multiple occasions that there is absolutely no "reasonable doubt" in any of the murder 1 cases, then that's a very bad toaster. If toasters know they'll potentially face a death penalty, perhaps they'd kill fewer people. I don't know. There is quite often, however, reasonable doubt in murder trials.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

One solution I got from a teacher was that you only apply the death penalty when it's impossible for someone else to be guilty.

So you have to hold a second trial to rule out there being any other possible perpetrator before you can kill them.

A lot of bother but maybe less time with people hanging around on death row going through appeals.