Theocracy alive and well in Utah (and considerations of the death penalty)

quote:

---

You know the killer. You grew up with him. He said, "Howdy," when in walked in the door-- then killed your friend. The point is, you claim it is NEVER possible to be sure. It is possible.

---

hypothetical situations can be used to argue anything, but our judicial system doesn't allow for a scale of confidence. where would the cut off point be in certainty be?i think cash is right in that in the real world the death penalty just doesn't work. just like communism... hooray for everyone being provided for, but you always have circumstances that you can't account for.on a bit of a different topic, i see the judicial system as a means to protect society first and foremost. punishment isn't really a means to protect society unless it's used as a form of rehabilitation.

quote:

---

Yes, it does. It is called 'reasonable doubt.'

---

what i mean is there is no scale that goes from innocent to guilty with different point in between. the jury doesn't say "probably guilty" or "probably not guilty" or "innocent" or "not guilty". The only options they have are guilty and not guilty.The problem comes when you have a distinction between a conviction because there is no reasonable doubt, and a conviction because there is absolute certainty. there is a huge difference between absolute certainty and no reasonable doubt. You can never say "well that just isn't feasible" with absolute certainty.

quote:

---

This I can't accept. Sequestering criminals protects the rest of us, whether rehabilitation is a result or not.

---

so separating criminals from society protects society... but that says nothing about ending the criminal's life. any form of punishment beyond their separation from society is unwarranted unless it is used to rehabilitate.

The primary purpose of the justice system is to protect innocent civilians. the secondary purpose of the justice system is to rehabilitate criminals so that they can rejoin society. in my opinion the justice system should not be used to punish criminals for punishment's sake. therefore, any punishment that does result should have the goal of rehabilitation (i.e. any form of punishment beyond their separation from society is unwarranted unless it is used to rehabilitate). the death penalty does not have the goal of rehabilitation, so is unwarranted.

perhaps sometimes, but should our justice system be responsible for deciding what the person would rather have? like crashfrog says, life in prision leave open the possibility to still be set free. the death penality does not.and to sidelined:i'm sure there are situations in which i would like to see people die for causing pain to people who are close to me. But emotions should not be the arbitrator for right and wrong. subjective emotions will produce an increadibly inconsistent system of justice. There are way too many variables for law enforcement, and the justice system to operate in a fair manner.