@edgarblythe,
I can, as a general rule , agree that cap punishment shouldnt be exacted. However, in the cases where the crime is particulrly heinous, evil, and premeditated,(like Malvo and Muhammed), I havent seen any argument against eacting the ultimate punishment.
1I personally want a guarantee that the life that performed these evil deeds isnt able to perform them again (even in a prison surrounds where they could, like Kahlid Sheik Muhammed, communicate orders to their accolytes outside to commit another 9/11)
2In these cases, what is the error in thinking that vengeance is NOT a societal motive? WOuld a mass criminal like Hitler been given a life without parole option).
3In the US, cap punishment increased in the 1990's to about 7 to 10 a year. (THis indicates to me that a swift exsecution of sentence was in the mix) and , as a result, from FBI statistics, murders decreased from a high of 10. in the 80's to a low of 5.8 in 2000. Was there a relationship?
4That argument that Life without parole or that extended appeals housing actually costs less doesnt hold wawa. Life without parole (again according to FBI) costs on average ,3.7 million while execution within a 10 year "reasonable appeal" window costs us 1.2 million.
5 Proven beyond any reasonable doubt(--this falls back on our legal system to "get it right"). capital punishment IS a deterrnet for the executed criminal. THat person will NEVER commit another evil and heinous crime.
SOcieties cannot, in an oversensitive sense of justice, ignore the effects that such crimes have on the lives of the victims families. In an effort to guarantee rights of the accused, we often seem to totally relegate the victims families , to a third class status.