I understand you guy's opinions, but the problem therein lies with the system itself not the punishment it employs. If I am wrongly convicted, I dunno how I'd feel if I was sentenced to life instead of the death penalty. Seems a screwed situation either way, but as a Christian, I see death as a promotion.
The death penalty should be determined by the states and that is where I come full circle with Dr. Paul because he does feel the same on who it should be left up to. We must fix the court problem first. The punishment dealt out is just a by product. By all means, I would leave it to the jury to fully determine if death is necessary and not left up to the lawyers. If the evidence proves the case and the jury allows it, I think the death penalty is better than the civilians of the state left to be taxed to pay for this bastard's welfare for his life sentence. That, my friends, is not liberty. I do feel there are worse things than death and perhaps we should have more chain gangs and "prisoners eat what they produce" programs to help deter crime.
Right, but unfortunately you cannot make decisions on life and death through the eyes of a religion, because not everyone believe they will go to a heave at death. Some even believe that all they have is this life, and after they are dead there is nothing. All they have is this life. We don't know who is right and who is wrong, so we can't make the decision. On top of that, there is freedom of religion or freedom to not have any at all.
I agree, the death penalty should be up to the states, just like it is now, just like guns, abortion, drugs, ect, ect. but I believe we'd have to repeal the Nationalistic which was an authoritarian move by the Radical Republics in Congress after the Civil War, 14th amendment for that to pass muster with guns, abortion, drugs, ect, ect. I'm a firm believe there should be no drug laws, gun laws, abortion laws on the Federal level. The Constitution didn't grant that power to the Federal or now National government, and they shouldn't even be able to make a law about them on the Federal now National level.
Its always been a perplexing question, is it better to rot in a jail cell, 23 hour lock down, for the rest of your life, with no contact to other humans and no objects in your cell, or to have a few hours of discomfort and then a very quick death, some more or less painful.
I've always argued that a death penalty is actually more humane.
Also, do some research, it is actually more expensive for the taxpayers if the person is put to death by the State then if they are put into jail for life with no parole. I know it seems completely against everything that seems common sense, but its actually true. Do some research.
Also, if the State doesn't have a death penalty, then the jury cannot decide to give that punishment. I agree, it should all depend on the jury.
I just see a state that allows the death penalty as an extension of an over-bearing authoritarian and tyrannical government. When you have the power to quickly take a man's life, (Timothy McVeigh) you also have a way to quickly hush up people that may have other wise talked and given away specific information that would prove government involvement with certain things.
It has nothing to do with the court system, and everything to do with keeping government in check and keeping corruption within our own government down. When they can take your life, they can hush you up forever. I don't trust my government with that kind of power.
Like I said, it feels good when a mass murderer or a rapist gets the death penalty, but my principles override my feelings of joy and revenge that I get from hearing of a really bad criminal put to death.
