ednrgc wrote:
On the other hand, the real sentence is being handed to the family of the person that was killed.
Yes, that's true ! Because I am against killing I think I avoid this sight of the problem a little bit, because I can understand the victims family's urge to see the killer dead. But can this feeling survive 27 years as in this case ? I'm not sure.
ednrgc wrote:
but I somehow feel that the family may get some (shallow) closure with the death penalty.
The state kills the killer, thus giving revenge to the family. I think that not an anonymous agent of the state should finally bring death to the criminal. These who are keen on revenge - the family of the victim - should be given the opportunity to deliver the death sentence. I'm sure if this were so, many of the delinquents would not have been killed. (This was just an idea for discussion).
ednrgc wrote:
If he stays in prison, he may eventually get out to commit the crime again.
That is why I am convinced that instead of death penalties, the punishment should be a life sentence for prison - where life really means life - so that the person never again has the opportunity to get dangerous for society again. Marius
--------------------------------------------------------- Complete freedom is a state without context ---------------------------------------------------------