Laurel talks of the death penalty, and I left a comment that I figured I'd bring up here to illustrate my view on the topic.
Well, as a gun owner, I cannot say I am against the death penalty. In defense of my own life and that of my family's, I am willing to risk becoming an instant judge, jury, and executioner if need be. The concept of taking a human life in and of itself is something we as gunnies always must consider as our actions to stop an immediate threat may end up costing someone their life. A situation like what you and I are likely (hopefully not) to encounter is of course much different. We will be required to use overwhelming force to stop an immediate threat where as once the criminal is captured, the prison ostensibly should be enough 'force' to do the same. I do believe, however, that there are people this world is simply better off without. Some monsters cannot be reformed and their incarceration costs the taxpayers an undue burden. I will readily admit that some of the worst may provide benefits via study in attempts to glean insights into what makes them tick and hopefully give us the tools to track down others before they can cause too much damage, but for the most part the thought of executing them outright doesn't morally bother me as they continue to be a drain on society. With all that said, I totally disagree that we should have a death penalty on the books. Not because I find the concept immoral or repugnant, but because I have no faith in our justice system to mete out the appropriate punishment. If you are guilty and wealthy, you can buy enough lawyer and walk free. If you are poor and a good scapegoat, your innocence doesn't matter so long as the DA can show they're 'doing something'. With the average person committing three felonies a day, we no longer even have a system that allows innocent men and women to exist. With the failures of the populace to demand reform of the justice system, the death penalty is not an option I want the government to have in their toolbox.
Well, as a gun owner, I cannot say I am against the death penalty. In defense of my own life and that of my family's, I am willing to risk becoming an instant judge, jury, and executioner if need be. The concept of taking a human life in and of itself is something we as gunnies always must consider as our actions to stop an immediate threat may end up costing someone their life.
A situation like what you and I are likely (hopefully not) to encounter is of course much different. We will be required to use overwhelming force to stop an immediate threat where as once the criminal is captured, the prison ostensibly should be enough 'force' to do the same.
I do believe, however, that there are people this world is simply better off without. Some monsters cannot be reformed and their incarceration costs the taxpayers an undue burden. I will readily admit that some of the worst may provide benefits via study in attempts to glean insights into what makes them tick and hopefully give us the tools to track down others before they can cause too much damage, but for the most part the thought of executing them outright doesn't morally bother me as they continue to be a drain on society.
With all that said, I totally disagree that we should have a death penalty on the books. Not because I find the concept immoral or repugnant, but because I have no faith in our justice system to mete out the appropriate punishment. If you are guilty and wealthy, you can buy enough lawyer and walk free. If you are poor and a good scapegoat, your innocence doesn't matter so long as the DA can show they're 'doing something'. With the average person committing three felonies a day, we no longer even have a system that allows innocent men and women to exist. With the failures of the populace to demand reform of the justice system, the death penalty is not an option I want the government to have in their toolbox.
your innocence doesn't matter so long as the DA can show they're 'doing something'