Following up on the topic of capital punishment, I tend to view the issue almost as an aesthetic one — a matter of taste — albeit an important one. Abolitionists cannot show that innocents are being executed. Proponents (to my understanding) cannot show a significant deterrent effect at any level of use that is likely to occur in this society. They can point to killers who have been released and killed again, but this is makes the moral case for life sentences without parole, not for the death penalty. In the end, it may come down to this: some people would prefer to live in a society where the state never executes people; others would rather live in a society where the state takes retribution against heinous killers. In my view, neither side is taking an immoral position, but I now side with the retributionists. So, apparently, do most Americans.
Most Read on Power Line
- Should We Feel Sorry for Obama?
- The Democrats Try To Shut Their Opponents Up (Cont.)
- Breaking: Obamacare Takes Torpedo Below the Water Line
- The Nutroots Are Worried, And We Have the Answer
- What's next after Obamacare's defeat in Halbig v. Burwell? [updated]
- Pro bono law morphs into left-wing lawfare
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Find us on Facebook
“Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.” Winston Churchill
“Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof.” Inscription on the Liberty Bell