Originally Posted by
atpcliff
Hi.
Here are two reasons:
First, and MOST IMPORTANT, by FAR!!!-they may be INNOCENT of the crimes they were convicted of. The state of Illinois stopped executing their death-row inmates when they discovered that about 40% of them were innocent!
This statistic is due to pretty much one thing: DNA
- Many folks were convicted before DNA testing (or ubiquitous video cameras) was available. Back then, circumstantial evidence was often the only evidence available to weigh. If you disallowed circumstantial evidence, then very few criminals would ever be held accountable, and crime rates would soar.
- It is now possible to go back and apply DNA technology to old pre-DNA cases. The 40% rate is due to this corrective action.
- Going forward, wrongful convictions should be greatly reduced, largely due to DNA (essentially all death penalty cases involve murder, and DNA evidence is usually available unless a professional hitman is involved).
Originally Posted by
atpcliff
Second-It costs more to execute them than it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their lives.
This is an artificiality...there is no law of physics which says it HAS to cost that much. You could probably execute a criminal for about $2500 in labor and materials I would guess. The process should be dramatically streamlined, with a fixed time limit for appeals (say two years). The scope of the appeals should also be severely narrowed...the fact that one of the criminal's assistant defense attorneys fell down and skinned his left knee at age 5 is not relevant...limit the appeals to the facts of the case.
Obviously the standards required to hand down a death sentence need to be very high...which I believe they are today, more so than in 1980.