|
I understand the philosophy of it, LS, but do you really feel comfortable with our govt/legal system making the choice as to whether a person's life should be taken? What about folks who were innocent, or acted in self defense? That isn't probably considered "cold blooded" to you, but why should we leave that decision in the hands of an already misguided, if not incompetant group of people? Who is fit to make that judgement? You? Me? The victims of a crime? An educated removed individual sitting behind a wooden podium? A group of conditioned people sitting in wooden benches having had all kinds of spin flung at them by lawyers looking to win a case? I don't feel comfortable giving anyone that kind of power.
Sure, there are a lot of sick people out there, looking to hurt you or your family. And if one of them does, how does revenge on that person really fix the problem? It just gets rid of the person who did it, but it doesn't rid you of the experience. It will happen with other sick people and their innocent victims. So are we just going to shoot everyone who gets acused of a crime worthy of it? And which crimes *are* worthy of killing someone?
|