"Dally" <
[email protected]> wrote
> David Cohen wrote:
>
>> Most people arrested by the police are guilty. An even higher
>> percentage of those arrested for murder are guilty. An even higher
>> percentage of those actually charged/indicted for murder are guilty.
>> Nearly everyone convicted of murder is guilty. The exceptions are rare,
>> and therefore newsworthy. You never hear the news state "Joe Schmuck,
>> on death row, is STILL guilty."
>>
>> You, and your Tookie Williams liberal fantasies, notwithstanding.
>
> I didn't protest Tookie Williams' execution.
>
> I don't dispute your assertion, either. I just want to focus a little bit
> of attention on MOST people, and "higher percentage", and "nearly everyone
> convicted is guilty". I totally agree. But the point is that sometimes,
> in low percentage of times, in freakish circumstances, someone is NOT
> guilty of the crime in which they are suspected, charged and convicted.
>
> That's why the death penalty is wrong. The evil of executing an innocent
> person outweighs the very little good you might attribute to it.
Congratulations. Sincerely. You have identified the one, and only, valid,
sound, argument against the death penalty.
In an ideal system, those found guilty of a crime that would, if the system
was perfect, would deserve death, would be placed in inescapable, super
maximum solitary confinement, fed basic food and water, given books to read,
and paper and pen to write, and would live there until they died.
However, unfortunately, despite the imperfection of the system, the morally
acceptable alternative described above does not exist. So, we are faced with
a lesser-of-too-evils type of choice: death penalty, or "life", which can
lead to escape, killing of other inmates, killing of guards, etcetera. An
argument can be made for both sides. I choice the death penaly side, despite
the fact that a very few innocent people will die.
Arguments like Trace's are just ********.
David
