>> Not sure if it would act as a deterrant but I'd like to think it would at least engender genuine remorse on the part of my murderer <s>
>
>I'm pretty sure the research shows that the death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent. (Okay, folks, you don't need to chime in with the usual response that it deters the one killed. We know that, but the claim is that the threat that will be executed will stop people from committing murder and the research says that's not true.)
>
>Tamar

And I just poled myself ( and man, did that hurt ) I found out I 100% don't care. <s> While I agree keeping somebody on death row for 20 years then finally spinning their Wheel of Samsara when they don't even remember what they did doesn't deter much.

Do you know why crack houses with lots of cash on hand don't get robbed more often? It is becuase a death penalty with teeth in it *does* act as a deterant.

But sure death, no sympathy or dignity within 6 months of the crime would be a lot more effective. of course there should never be a death penalty when there is doubt you've got the right offender, but if three guys go in to stick up a convenience store and the owner gets killed, I think the risk is entirely on the part of the perpetrators. I don't care which one pulled the trigger. If they were all there, they all made a bad, fatal decision. Actions have consequences. I don't want to feed them for 50 years. I think it is capital crime if the owner had a heart attack a week after the robbery from stress. Bad luck for the robbers. But situation could have been avoided. They lose.

I really do understand the argument against the state putting someone to death. If I were a better person I might even agree with it. But I'm not. There are people who do things that are beyond the pale. They no longer qualify as human life which is sacred. I am really more likely to stand on the street with a candle for the murdered shop owner than for the person who killed him. There is no moral equivalency.