I too oppose the Death Penalty for the reasons mention in the post and I also feel the sale way about this;

"Hell, yes, and if I could enact it myself, I would try. And then fully accept any punishment put upon me by the justice system for taking vigilante actions."

"Now, before anyone starts off with "If someone tortured and murdered YOUR child, wouldn't you then want the death penalty?" Hell, yes, and if I could enact it myself, I would try. And then fully accept any punishment put upon me by the justice system for taking vigilante actions."

However, my answer is and will always be to the above alternative. I would rather think of someone who has done violence to anyone I loved or cared about being locked up for life, no parole. In fact, what I would wish for is that during that person's incarceration that they would truly come to understand the horror of what they did and have to live day in and day out truly and deeply experiencing the guilt of their murderous acts. And even if they never felt a moments guilt I would rather have them locked up in prison and suffering, than dead and free from earthly pain.

The death penalty is barbaric and contributes to the barbarism of our society, it is not a deterrent, it is a disgrace.

Thanks for bringing this up as a subject.

Capital punishment needed-some crimes deserve ultimate
Q: What about this case that means the United States nearly executed over 100 people who didn't do it.
EDWARDS: Very serious issue, and it means we need to take lots of serious steps to deal with it, which means using DNA testing. It means making all of the most modern technologies available. It means making the court system work, not just for those who can hire the best lawyers money can buy, but for folks who have to have indigent counsel. I've seen what happens in court rooms. I know how important it is to have a lawyer representing an indigent defendant who knows what they're doing.
Q: Why do you favor capital?
EDWARDS: Because I think there are some crimes -- those men who dragged James Byrd behind that truck in Texas, they deserve the death penalty. And I think there are some crimes that deserve the ultimate punishment.
Source: Democratic 2004 primary debate at USC Feb 26, 2004

Death penalty for heinous crimes, but applied fairly
Q: Do you support the death penalty?
A: I believe the death penalty is the most fitting punishment for the most heinous crimes, and I support it. But we need reforms in the death penalty to ensure that defendants receive fair trials, with zealous and competent lawyers, and with full access to DNA testing.
Source: Associated Press policy Q&A, "Death Penalty" Jan 25, 2004

Supports the death penalty
I support greater emphasis on drug treatment and elimination of mandatory minimums for certain non-violent crimes. I also support the death penalty and reform of our probation and parole systems to provide more support and supervision.
Source: Vote-Smart Presidential National Political Awareness Test Jan 8, 2004
More DNA testing to reduce wrongful capital convictions
Edwards supports bringing DNA technology to smaller police departments, to lower-level crimes, and to cold cases. He also believes we should clear the backlog of untested rape kits in unsolved cases, and make DNA testing more available to death penalty defendants to reduce the risk of wrongful convictions. He will accompany increased DNA testing with strong protections to safeguard our civil liberties.
Source: Campaign website, JohnEdwards.com, "Real Solutions" Jan 1, 2004

Good post Karen...my 17 yr old son and I had this talk a couple nights ago. He brought up the DNA discrepancies too.

Crime is linked to poverty.
Poverty is linked to crime and drug use.
Drug use or alcoholism is usually behind crimes committed.

That's why our society needs jobs in inner cities to offset the crime and poverty. Edwards understands those notions.

We have laws to protect us from crime. The criminal has rights too. It would be disturbing to let high crime criminals walk free. It would also be just as disturbing to see someone pinned with something they didn't do, to suffer a jail, or death sentence. That's why there's things like: bail, 'beyond reasonable doubt' and a host of other laws built into the system, to protect both sides of the crime, it's middle ground for those offenses falling in between.

death penalty, since, due to human nature being not perfect, the wrong person could be convicted and be actually given the death penalty before the justice system realizes the wrong person had his/her sentence carried out. With life imprisonment without parole, if the wrong person was convicted and the right one subsequently found out, you can safely reverse the prior conviction and set that newly found innocent person free.

Remember, a wrongly convicted person cannot be set free after he/she actually dies due to the sentence having been carried out: It'll be too late to reverse the sentence because you cannot just wake the person up after death and say, "Sorry, we now found you innocent so you can wake up now. Enjoy your reversal and regained life." Such a feat would be impossible!!

Since my opposition to the death penalty is fairly well known to those who meet me, I am often faced with the question: what if it was YOUR child/husband/mother/whatever that was murdered? This is especially true since the triple homicide/home invasion in my state that happened this summer and made national news. My answer? What if it was your son who did the killing? That usually stops people in their tracks and makes them realize that capital punishment doesn't just affect the offender.

As for the wrongful convictions: folks, they are real, and they are INEVITABLE. If you are comfortable paying the price of a flawed death penalty system (that price being that there WILL be a wrongful execution from time to time), then I guess we have nothing to talk about.