D
Let's assume it is very very very rare. Out of all executed prisoners, 1/1000 were innocently executed (which we know isn't as rare). Does that life not matter to you or society? Do you just say to the family, "sorry, we weren't 100% certain he was guilty and we killed him anyway"? That isn't sorrow if you'd do the same exact thing again. If 1/1000 unborn children were aborted, wouldn't that still be a travesty?
I don't hold it against you that you think your judicial system is perfect (you said you specifically don't think that happens today). I don't even think the biggest pro capital punishment people would agree with your claim that it's perfect now.
I don't hold it against you that you think your judicial system is perfect (you said you specifically don't think that happens today). I don't even think the biggest pro capital punishment people would agree with your claim that it's perfect now.
I'm all for the appeal system to be updated now to protect the innocent. (DNA testing has improved in the last ten years, so it should be an automatic that the crime scene tests are done again with newer equipment and in-a-rush, when the criminal is getting close to execution date. I also believe the judicial system ought to update what must happen to start a new trial. And I really do like the double-indemnity aspect of the law of our country, because your country has "intentional murder" only be punished with a mere 15 years, if not "horrendous" -- apparently, I can get away with murder in your country as long as I do it in the right style) BUT, I'm not ever going to believe God was wrong about killing murderers. I prefer his law. At least we're not warehousing people that way. There were no prisons back then. There were cities of refuge -- a good place to live for manslaughter cases and for those who are at risk of being killed by the victim's family after raping a woman/girl in that family.