Kitteh Wrote:So one more time, a .01% chance of an innocent condemned to death does not bother you, and permanent isolate lifetime sentences wouldn't be punishment enough.
Circular reasoning.
Again, it's way less than 0.01% and it doesn't bother me because there is no way even in our modern society to conduct the criminal justice system with a 0% chance of error. You are not attacking my point in any way, you are simply restating yours.
Dude, you seriously need to quit at this point. I have completely trashed your argument and I have gone so far as to provide you with two arguments that would serve you much better in a debate of this type than this 0.01%-chance-of-error bull$hit. Why not read up on those? Because you know, the constitutional and philosophical/historical arguments are actually valid and take WAY more effort to defend again. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not cheap BS peddled by C-list writers. You can interpret it many different ways, but a solid interpretation of the Constitution is pertinent to state and federal law. The stance adopted by most 1st world countries in this matter is at least somewhat relevant in deciding how this 1st world country should behave, because most of those countries have literally thousands more years of history and tradition than we do. There is no way to conclusively refute those arguments, becuase they have basis in truth and legal precendent, rather than being grounded in demagoguery and BS. By learning them, you will actually be able to argue against the death penalty in an intelligent fashion.