Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
however we don't get a perfect world, we get a justice system that throws teenagers in prison for a decade just for being a kid, and murderers can get away with only a few years behind bars. would you really trust a system like that with getting the ultimate sentence right? when those in charge care more about politics and furthering their own agendas, you'll never have a truly fair trial. just reading about all the guys who have been on death row who were wrongly convicted makes my stomach turn
|
Well said. I often say in arguments about this that for me, a prerequisite for supporting the death penalty would be a justice system that never makes mistakes.
But of course, that's an impossible standard. For me, the bigger argument is a moral one--how can we teach the message that killing people is wrong if the state also kills people? Shouldn't the state be held to the highest moral standard in the land?
I don't have data or studies to back up this claim--but I would guess that a stable society with strong ethical values, widespread social equality (i.e. a vibrant and populous middle class) and both help and opportunity for the desperate would prevent far more crimes than deterrence in any case.
Deterrence is based on a police state model--the idea being that we would all commit crimes if we didn't know we'd be punished. What would be the result of moving to a values-based model where laws are enforced, but a culture of obeying laws because they are right and just is fostered and taught?