anjohl: I was thinking the exact same thing last night while I was watching a program about torture devices "inspiring" modern technology. The particular device was a turning crank that wound someone's intestines up and around a spindle.
*Anyone* that would do that to another person for *any* reason is a wretched, despicable creature. Yes, monkeys will savagely beat a rival to death, often in gang-style killings, but they would never restrain someone and kill them excruciatingly slow.
Navagon: To a lesser extent, I find the same to be true of the death penalty. To set a date of execution some years away that the inmate is fully aware of, make them choose the means of execution and then in the most cold and calculated manner possible, kill them. That seems far worse than what they're actually punishing (most of the time). At the very least its a hypocrisy.
For this to be the solution sought by a supposedly rational society for its more extreme problems does show up the negative aspects of human nature far worse than any sudden act of brutality in the heat of the moment.
ZamFear: Naturally. Dolphins don't have fingers. :)
LOL
I laughed at the last part too!
But seriously, my problem with the death penalty is twofold, though I *am* a supporter of it's limited use.
Firstly, if you are going to give someone the death penalty, the appeal process should be rapid, and if failed, the prisoner should be killed rapidly. I think a legislated maximum death row stay shoudl be imposed to FORCE the courts to work out the appeals and such faster. IE, if you put someone on death row for a year and they are not executed, they get downgraded (upgraded?) to a life senteance, with or without eligibility of parole, depending on the crime.
Secondly, the death penalty is problematic because of the nature of our criminal justice system. Several high-profile cases exist in Canadian law where persons were wrongly imprisoned for life, who were later exonerated. The primary goal of the justice system should be to only imprison the guilty, which is the true purpose of "innocent until PROVEN guilty". Unfortunately, due in part to the 80's "conservative triangle" of Thatcher, Reagan, and Mulrooney, the public has this perception that crime is about "making them pay" and that "tough senteances" will stop crime, which is utter rubbish.
The sole existance of the criminal justice system is to protect society by incarnerating where nessasary, and rehabilitating where possible an offender in order to protect and serve both the public and the offender.