U.S. Supreme Court Gives the OK for the Worst Crime Ever

I'm going to bypass the rest and get right to this.

I am one of those who believes in the death penalty under the correct circumstances.

Please see my previous post..


http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8280893&postcount=3
and this one
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8284170&postcount=22

I have many on this forum on the death penalty

 

I would say we're pretty like-minding on the situations in which the death penalty is and is not acceptable, then. This is something I've read on and thought over quite a bit. Most importantly, 1) there can be no doubt the convicted is guilty. It has to be solid (and we need more standard, clear criteria for what qualifies for capital punishment and what doesn't).

Secondly, with my philosophy on capital punishment, it should be used as a crime deterrent. This poses a problem, because while I think it need to be completely clear the convicted is guilty, if the death penalty is to decrease crime it needs to be used more frequently - and with endless appeals, this isn't possible. So for it to protect against wrongful convictions and to be used more frequently/as a crime deterrent, we would need a radical re-evaluation of our justice system.

That being said, I still think the decision over what is and is not sufficient or appropriate or moral punishment for virtually any crime should be left up to the state in which the crime took place - without interference of the federal government.

 

I strongly disagree, according to our constitution the Federal government does have oversight and rightfully so on this situation.