The risk of executing an innocent person is the number one argument against the death penalty, and as a practical matter it is one I can appreciate. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the death penalty is good in principle.
In any case, losing 20 years of your life for a crime you didn’t do sucks too, and you will never get those years left. Should we just not punish people on the basis that there is a tiny chance that they were wrongly convicted?
I notice in another post that you imply that ‘vengeance’ doesn’t bring closure. You may be right about that, but again as a practical matter, the death penalty brings closure to the victim’s family. Kelsey Grammar, the guy who played ‘Frasier’ frequently has to go through the ordeal of persuading a parole board not to release his sister’s murderer. He wouldn’t have to put up with this if the state had just executed him as they should have done, instead the past keeps being dredged up just so that this worthless scumbag can get an ill-deserved chance of freedom every now and again.
the death penalty is good in principle
The death penalty is actually an unjust and unrighteous act because it punishes and condemns a man for an act that has already been judged and condemned. This guy's heinous and horrific acts were already judged, condemned, and punished on the body of Jesus Christ 2000 years ago. Our punishing him again is unrighteous and unjust becasue the same act is now being judged twice.
the death penalty brings closure to the victim’s family...so that this worthless scumbag can['t] get an ill-deserved chance of freedom
A penal system that does not protect society from dangerous criminals does not justify killing those criminals. The broken penal system needs to be fixed.