I think it`s irrelevant where I`m from. I never heard a convincing argument "pro" death penalty, and if you want to change my mind you must be much better. Why do you think death penalty is better in some cases than life imprisonment?
It seems futile to argue with the invincibly ignorant, but one must try nevertheless.
1. There will be death penalties as long as there are murderers. So-called "opponents of capital punishment" are really arguing for 100% privatization of the death penalty.
2. Carrying out a sentence of life imprisonment is expensive, and provides the inmate, while he or she is maintained at public expense, with free access to legal services and opportunity to engineer help from outside sympathizers along with indefinite further opportunities to commit further privatized capital punishment while incarcerated, and to play the legal system over time to obtain release and thus access to the general public, where further murders, robberies, scams, and other crimes can be perpetrated.
3. If strictly enforced by the efforts of such people as yourself, the strict privatization of capital punishment encourages the development of private organizations to provide the vengeance services that have been stripped from the civil government, thus threatening its claim to a monopoly on the lawful use of force.
Still, I realize that effective lifetime incarceration can be as severe as execution, if applied in a sufficiently stringent manner. If the advocates of 100% privatization would be willing to put their money where their mouth is, the public might be willing to give their proposal a serious look. So, develop such a proposal if you wish. Here would be the basic requirements of a succesful proposal:
1. The system including liability costs, as described below, and all other maintenance expenses, must be 100% funded by the voluntary non-tax-deductible contributions of people like yourself.
2. If funding fails, or falls short at any time, the authorized maximum number of inmates must be re-assessed at periodic intervals (period to be no longer than one calendar month) and inmates must be selected at random by a tested and validated lottery method and promptly executed whenever their number exceeds the legally authorized inmate count for the facility. The system may advertise, at its own expense or using additional (non-tax-deductible) contributions of its well-wishers, to make such shortages more widely known and solicit further voluntary funding.
3. Operators of the system must accept 100% liability for any failures to contain their charges, and further depredations committed by the escapees resulting from such failures. Terms for the enforcement of this condition must be stringent and the reserves for fulfillment of it must be kept adequately funded at all times by a privately underwritten liability insurance program. The premiums for such coverage must be kept current, as part of the enforcement of the 2nd condition above. Advocates of the system must be willing to sign on, like Lloyds names, putting their personal assets 100% at risk in the event premiums are inadequate to cover liability judgments against the system operators.
4. Inmates of the system should have no access to the general public, including friends, family members, publicity seekers, well wishers, etc. Just like their victims, they should be totally cut off from the society from which they removed their victims. In order to minimize escape opportunities, and opportunities to inflict further privatized capital punishment inside the institution, the form of inmates' containment should be permanent solitary confinement, like their victims, who occupy solitary graves.