>The subject of the death penalty can often bring people to >express themselves intemperately. I am assuming here that >everyone wishes to continue the thread.

Correct on both counts, jseal. At least for my part.

Belial, my point is *not* "an eye for an eye, a toothe for a tooth, a life for a life". For one thing, I'm not a christian.

But to argue dispassionately, we can ask "what is justice"?
A system of justice:
1. Prevents crimes from happening in the first place.
2. Corrects the unjust act.
3. Prevents future crimes from happening.

In the cases of arrest and conviction, 1 is not possible. We can ask: is it possible to apply point 2?

No. No act, life imprisonment or execution can restore a normal life to those who were shot and wounded, nor restore any life to those who were murdered.

Is it possible to apply point 3?
The vast majority of murders are actually comitted by a fairly small number of people. IOW, it it demonstrable that people who have murdered in the past are likely to murder again.
Now, we can ask, is John Allen Muhammed likely to kill again if he is allowed to live?
The answer must be yes.
Will life imprisonment guarrantee that he won't kill again? No. Absolutely not. There have been cases where convicted murders have escaped and killed, either in the act of escape or while fugitives. And there have also been murders comitted by people who were members of criminal organizations in efforts to free their compatriots. And in some cases, those compatriots have been freed, and have comitted murder again.

It is entirely appropriate to guarrantee that JAM does not commit murder again. It is therefore, appropriate to apply the death penalty in his case.

__________________
On the kinkometer, my kink measures as a sine wave.