"...I agree with Perry on this one. What are your thoughts?"
I'm kind of shy of the death penalty. The problem, as I see it, is that I just don't like the possibility of government to pass laws and lay down the death penalty as a consequence to lawmaking gone wrong.
Now, don't get me wrong. I understand the need for killing a real bad man (or woman). It's just that giving the state the license to do so on the justification of their legal whoredom is troublesome.
As an alternative, I suggest that upon conviction of Murder 1, the guilty is refered to the victim's surviving kin for thumbs up or down.
If thumbs up, the guilty spends the rest of his/her life in the Joint - no parole. My idea of prison is 6 days of work in 10 hour days. No TV, movies or phone. Three hots and a cot and adequate medical care but no weight rooms, special diets or heroic medicine. The prison population should sustain itself through industry.
If thumbs down, the family would select a member of it choosing to deliver the injection of the lethal cocktail.
In this way, all manner of justice would be served:
1) Society would be protected.
2) The guilty would pay for their crimes with their lives.
3) The wronged would have justice and, if they wish, revenge.
4) Lethal power would be restricted to the people.
5) Mercy would be an option for those of merciful inclination.
6) Life imprisonment would be assured if the death penalty were not invoked.
7) Life imprisonment might be worse than death for many criminals.
8) Society would be freed from the cost of prisoner support.
9) Revenuse might actually acrue from prison work and go towards aiding victims of crime.
10) The certainty of death or a lifetime of work would, in fact, deter crime.
either you have read some of my past writings on this topic, or we are just naturally on the same wavelength!