The Death Penalty - are you for or against it and why?

[Autumnlicious]

Wanting to get at the "serial killers" and damn the innocent men we may sentence to death, because our justice system is so perfect or we artificially limit "who" gets the death penalty (disregarding the invariable circumstance when someone is charged and railroaded anyways)?

Is that what he suggested? Did he actually say, "I agree with the death penalty as it stands now. Collateral damage is not an issue for me." It is possible to agree with the death penalty and not want to kill innocent people, you know.

You, Epi and others have not provided any real answer to the question of sentencing the wrong people to death. You (referring to your side) have routinely brought up special cases, ranging from inmate escapes (really? make the prison better -- escape means the security is shitty.) to the "serial killer problem" (in which you specifically target serial killers under the pretense of them "not being rare").

This would communicate this to me:
1) You have no answer to our concerns, so thus "damn any innocent man who does manage to slip through" (of which we do know happens, and happens more than we'd like) [innocence project].
2) You'd rather get your dead man, whatever category, class, crime, etc,.
3) "Who" deserves death doesn't matter -- you'll cleverly increase or decrease the qualifiers for whom deserves state-sponsored death with rationalizations and emotional appeals, not objective measures (which brings it's own flamefest of trouble, I'm afraid).

So no, whether you "want" to avoid executing innocent people or not, it doesn't fucking matter.

You're arguing for a system that fundamentally is structured with "no take backs" in mind. And to add salt to the wound, you're arguing for a system chaired by men in one of the most religious nations on this planet.

Frankly, knowing the batshit in the air, I'm surprised that you wouldn't be back pedaling on this (if not for logic, for the consequences such advice, given the society you live in).

Wanting to keep a death penalty under cause of "they might escape"?

There is a very real threat of them escaping. Downplaying that and upplaying (for lack of a better term, as I find the execution of innocent men just as distasteful as you. I simply use the term to show the imbalance between the two potentials for innocent death being applied here) is kind of strange. "Oh, they might get out." said in sarcasm shows an ignorance of how many of them actually escape and kill more people or stay in jail and kill more people. There is a real threat and, yes, people can be threats. They can be other adjectives used to describe objects as well.

Shell, if these "men" under jurisdiction and watch of the state escape, it means this:
The prison is flawed and some process was shoddy enough to allow for that escape.

And if you argue the "threat angle", why don't you bloody come out with it and just admit you want them on the firing line upon their first escape attempt?

Because that's what you're going to get to if you insist on blaming ridiculous failure of the prison (which, last I checked, exists solely to hold these people for a set period of time).

It is more likely your "serial killer" will get clemency from a Governor Huckabee than escape by their own hand.