Two things.. as a "big fan" of J.S.Mill and Utilitarian thought at large I find it difficult to determing the best off situation for the society as a whole when it comes to criminal execution (case by case basis).
I do tend to think that since we have not yet perfected the way of identifying the truly guilty, we should not have the death penalty.
Another point deals with (gradually) giving too much power to (supposedly) democratic regimes.. what if (for whatever reason) that regime turns more dictatorial or is overthrown by a dictatorial one.. well it would be much easier for "new" regime to point back and say.. well YOU have death penalty.... (you see my point.. read EXPANSION)
On yet another hand.. what punishment should we apply if not the death penalty? Gulags? Again.. since we can't yet truly prove guilt in most "death penalty deserving" cases.... plus there's the earlier expansion point..
Last by not least.. we're really showing our value for human life when we take life of X in order to say that x taking Y's life was wrong. (Some will say.. Utilitarianism.. eye for an eye.. well not quite.. there's the "overall," "general" good.. not just what happends "to" Y's relatives, etc..
Hrm.. it's too early
