>>>>Do you understand WHY Illinois has abandoned capital punishment? Did you read the article?
>>>>
>>>>Yes, I read it. And in cases where there is some question as to guilt, even after a conviction, I'm fine with life in jail. If the person is later proven not guilty (which rarely happens, but I acknowledge it does occur), you can release the person, you can make restitution, etc.
>>>>
>>>>But where there's zero question as to guilt (e.g. the case in Florida with the mother and BF beating the hell out of a 3 year old), I say strap them in the chair, shave their heads, attach the electrodes, and let them ride the lightning.
>>>
>>>298 men and women were sentenced to death in Illinois in the past 25 years. Of those, 18 have been exonerated — a rate of 6%.
>>>
>>>So are you trying to tell me that of those 18 that didn't do the crime that there was some question as to their guilt at the time they were sentenced to death? Obviously a jury or judge thought that there was "zero question" as to their guilt - and needless to say they were wrong. ...and I don't think a rate of 6% (that we KNOW of) is what I would consider "rarely". Furthermore a rate of .00001% when you're killing the guy isn't good enough.
>>
>>I guess you have not served on jury duty? While I don't support the death penalty, I am responding to your statement above in bold -- it is true that previously persons were sentenced to death without an overwhelming physical proof of guilt. In the past it did not take verifiable dna samples and hard evidence (dna sampling was not even possible and older hair and blood analysis for blood type and other specifics is not specific enough - even finger prints cannot prove a crime - only that a person with those prints at some time touched that surface). Often a witness, on top of blood evidence (but no DNA) would suffice to convince a jury and it's since been proven that eye witness accounts are not always accurate - even when the witness believes they are honestly remembering correctly and honestly believe the person is the same person they saw commit the crime. Studies in photo and live person line-ups have proven that.
>
>All good points and yes I've read about the problems with eyewitness accounts. True that previously persons were sentenced to death without an overwhelming physical proof of guilt...but I think that still holds true today. I agree that DNA helps a lot - but mistakes still happen.

Yes, I agree. That's one of the reasons I don't support the death penalty. The primary reason is simply that it's inhumane and brings you down to the level of the criminal. for most crimes, I think rehabilitation is the best answer (a program that works not the federally funded junk we have now). For those who commit a planned murder or truly violent crimes, I do not believe in rehabilitation. I believe in a life-time of punishment in a prison for violent offenders.