I absolutely abhor the death penalty. I do find this reliance on a single rationale to stop the death penalty problematic though:
- For many people I suspect that there is a combination of level of proof and severity of crime that would lead them to say the risk of erroneous conviction can be ignored.
- Someone will say let's focus on improving the justice system to deal with the errors.
I'd rather the burden of justification be the other way: what does the death penalty actually achieve, with a high burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) that as a policy it actually benefits society as a whole.
- For many people I suspect that there is a combination of level of proof and severity of crime that would lead them to say the risk of erroneous conviction can be ignored.
- Someone will say let's focus on improving the justice system to deal with the errors.
I'd rather the burden of justification be the other way: what does the death penalty actually achieve, with a high burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) that as a policy it actually benefits society as a whole.