I'd like to share this essay by Leonard Pitts Jr., a Pulitzer Prize winner, who raises significant concerns about the death penalty:

 

if the only eveidecne is a couiple witnesses, don't kill him. Forensic evidence? Shoot him in the head. The price of one bullet vs. a lifetime in jail? Tell me how that more expensive. Saying it's "wrong" is compltely your opinion. If somebody has killed (and there's evidence that proves it), lets give him what he gave his victim.

 

Death penalty is a just punishment for certain crime IMHO, when there is concrete evidence, no, titanium evidence. In this particular case it's more than uncertain, again, IMO.

 

The fact of the matter is that state execution, in its current form, is actually more expensive than a life-in-prison sentence.

I completely understand your reaction. I have had similar feelings when hearing and reading about awful, violent crimes. State execution is clearly a controversial, hot-button topic. Pitts' essay unambiguously states his personal position/opinion on the subject and supports it with hard facts. He writes with incredible clarity, so I thought that posting his essay would help shed light on his side of this controversial topic.

By the way, all opinions are welcome. Let's not turn this into a flame session. Maybe we'll get some interesting, intelligent discussion from this thread.

 

The thing is, punishment for many serious crimes are a joke here. There's no deterrent factor since people think "oh, we'll just do some time and it'll be done and over with". That's bad.

 

I say we go back the old days when they did public executions. That would be very cheap. I think if they did the crime they would deserve to get humiliated.

 

In my opinion, this would represent a step backwards because cheap would equate to even more of the types of mistakes that Pitts points out in his essay. Public executions just seem barbaric to me in that violent death would become a twisted form of public entertainment.

 

^ Maybe entertainment to some, but hell, what isn't entertainment to today's society. Today's society is pathetic when it comes to people's idea of "fun". For some, yes, it's killing, for others, playing sports, movies, getting high, beating people up, etc.

Just like in the old days, public executions (only for extreme cases where there is no question in innocence) will set an example for society to follow. If you were to see someone killed face to face for a certain crime, don't you think it will make you think twice before you get yourself in that same situation? I think that aspect in people's live is fading. I'm with Roto on this one, the disciplinary system in this country is a joke. I say an eye for an eye, not an eye for a slap on the wrist.

In conclusion, don't argue with me, I'm not arguing. I'm just presenting my input.

 

I hate when people throw the damn "race" card in.

 

Don't you think presenting opposing viewpoints (debate) is fine as long as it is done in a civil manner? I hope my responses did not cross that line.