What are the principles which force you to oppose the death penalty? I find that although most of my political positions are founded on principle this one is an exception. The best arguments against the death penalty are pragmatic instead.

Read up on the Mumia Abu Jamal case and see if that doesn't bring you over to the dark side.

Walter, most of the reasons I'm opposed to the death penalty are pragmatic in nature--I don't think that a perfect system can ever be put in place that would ensure that no innocent person was ever executed, for example.

But I do believe that society and individuals have no business killing when another, equally effective method of solving the problem can be attained. Sticking a person in a high security jail with no chance for parole serves that purpose in my book (although I admit that it's debatable on a couple of points).

This is a position, though, that has evolved over the last five years or so. Before that, I was solidly pro-capital punishment--and those tendencies still exist.

What I am about to say could be (and should be) the subject of a much longer post, but I believe that our criminal justice system should exist for the prevention of crime, and not for vengeance. Putting someone in jail for life will, under most circumstances, accomplish this. The death penalty is excessive with respect to this goal.

And for the record, Zombyboy and I have always had very close positions on the death penalty. I was just as pro-capital punishment as he was as recently as a couple of years ago.

Sorry, stump, but I'm going to ding you on this one. The criminal justice system has never existed for the purpose of preventing crime. Justice is not a word that has to do with prevention, or rehabilitation, for that matter. Justice has to do with meteing out punishment for an injustice done to society or another human being.

I participated in debates on capital punishment in college, and actually swung from anti-death penalty to pro-death penalty with some drastic modifications to the current system (swift, certain punishment after very high standards of evidence for a conviction - like eyewitnesses or incontrovertable evidence like DNA, now).

The reason was simple, for me. No matter how long that individual wastes in prison, whether feeling guilt and remorse or not, they are still alive, which is far more than the victim gets.

Some people say that people who support the death penalty show a dim view of life. I disagree. It is precisely because I value life so highly that I believe the only punishment that truly fits murder is to take the life of the murderer. In effect, I think the state, when it executes a convicted murderer: "We value life so much that when you took this person's life, you forfeited your right to live. This is justice for the victim, and a warning to those who would commit similar crimes."

Again, this is the justice system, not the grace system.

just my two cents worth.

Zombyboy,
You bring up two issues and that confuses the issue. As long as I am going to write a detailed post, I may as well continue this at my site. :-)

Since I added you to my links earlier today, you can be assured I respect your opinion. My comments are meant to engage some open dialogue, not to flame.

Cheers,
Admiral Quixote

ZB, the pragmatic objection to the death penalty seems to be centered around the possibility of executing the innocent. The elimination of the death penalty transfers the risk from defendants to others, prison guards and other workers, the other inmates, and the general public in the event of an escape.
The most often suggested replacement for the DP is life without the possibility of parole. Prisons are already incredibly dangerous places to work, as well as for the inmates. How much more dangerous would they be with the death row inmates released into the general population, with nothing to gain and nothing to lose? It's not like the Federal Courts would allow us to keep murderers completely and totally isolated .
I don't expect to change anyone's mind. Just bear in mind that when we remove the risk of unjust execution by eliminating the DP we leave open the certainty that at least some murderers will kill again. Those victims will die with with absolutely no regard to their guilt or innocence and no safeguards like automatic appeals.

Bryan: Given the way that our system currently works I believe that numerous agruments can be made to support the death penalty. You make several in your comments. It is important to note that I said "should." I believe that there are numerous flaws in the underpinnings of our current criminal justice system.

Basically, the problem with a system based on punishment is that a punishment is worthless if it does not prevent the punishable behavior. Punishment is preventative in two ways. First, many will choose to not misbehave because of the threat of punishment. Second, many will choose not to misbehave again once they have experienced the punishment. If a person continually misbehaves despite punishment then we say that "the punishment isn't working." This is as true of a parent punishing a child as it is of our criminal justice system. When a punishment exisits for reasons other than prevention then it is revenge, pure and simple.