The Death Penalty makes more sense than Solitary Confinement for Life.

"-The government capitalizing on the death of an individual like that? Selling one's death to the movie business? I would like to point out that the family of these murderers are a part of this too. If your father had murdered someone and had been sentenced to death, would you want it to be broadcast on TV or in the movies? That is a real human life, guilty or not." Well, they lost their right to their life, as I'll expand on later, so technically, the government can do what is necessary to repay for those trials using that life. "-On that same note, isn't the death penalty really hurting those closest to these murderers in many cases? Loving parents, siblings and friends will have to endure the same pain that the family of the victim endured. Is that fair? Is it fair to want to put these innocent people through the same pain that you went through just because someone you know was murdered by someone they know? Justice is not eye for an eye; it is higher than revenge, and that's what the death penalty really is: vengeance." But if that relative is in solitary confinement, you still can't contact them, and they'd perhaps suffer even longer. "-It's possible to frame someone for a death sentence? Ever seen 'The Life of David Gale'? Films aside though, the fact that people have been exonerated mean that technologies are NOT working, regardless of application. It's not a question of when, it's a question of new technologies always arising that help us determine people's guilt or innocence. We cannot simply speed up technologies that do that. They are created when they are created, thus application of technologies is not the issue; it is the DISCOVERY of new technologies that leads to exoneration so much of the time. The government executing one innocent person is tantamount to murder, is it not? Isn't killing an innocent person willfully, murder? If so, then the death penalty carries with it the probability that the government will murder someone." I'm for the death penalty for people who are absolutely proven to be guilty; this means DNA evidence, security tapes, etc. People should most definitely not be put to a death penalty on only witnesses' testimonies, especially the contradictory ones mentioned in your source. If there isn't hardcore proof, a death penalty should even be attempted. "-Firstly, I disagree entirely on the point of it being very difficult to find God without the help of a priest unless you're already a Christian. That statement also assumes the finding of a Christian god instead of any other religion's deity. Religion or spirituality can certainly be found on one's own." Okay, I just assumed the Christianity thing. Sorry. It's just so much tougher to find spirituality without a priest or a book. "-Secondly, as to your point about keeping someone alive who won't 'do anything with [their life]', doesn't that have serious implications outside this example? With that belief comes the belief that anyone in a coma should be killed, anyone in a vegetative state should be killed, anyone who will not live past the age of 3 will be killed, etc. All of these can follow from your statement. Those people will not be doing anything with their lives either, so why not kill them as well? Now, there may be reasons to pull the plug on a vegetative-brained person, but the 'they won't do anything with their life' argument is not one. Also, prisoners in solitary confinement will never be a danger to other prisoners. They won't be a danger to guards either if solitary confinement becomes the norm. There would be much less of a chance of a solitarily confined prisoners attacking a guard than one on death row." When you're sentenced to solitary confinement for life, you have nothing left in life to enjoy, either, and they can't get out except through prison escape. http://en.wikipedia.org... Also, it is possible to come out of a coma. And as for vegetative states, that's another thing up for debate about whether to kill them or not. In that case, I'm in favor of family members deciding, but in a criminal case, it's up to the justice system. And I'm not talking about prisoners killing prisoners; I'm talking about prisoners attacking the security guard who has to feed him. People on death row can all be clumped into one room with much more security that individual cells. "-Thirdly, on the point of a flood or disaster crushing a jail and freeing prisoners: This seems a little off the mark to me. What if a flood hit a jail full of burglars? Burglars would be roaming the streets. Should we kill burglars so as to make sure they won't get out via natural disaster? If you have numbers as to how many prisoners have escaped via natural disaster, that would be helpful." I'm just saying that it's a potential hazard of keeping so many criminals in one place. I have no evidence that it has ever happened, but it quite easily could. "-A quick sentence of lifetime solitary confinement without any chance of parole would bring a quicker end. The punishment would be swift, the murderer would go to solitary forever, and there would be no long appeals process to keep the person of off death row because death row would not exist. Murderers stay on death row for a very long time and it draws out the process because taking a life is a big deal. If they were to simply meet their punishment immediately after sentencing, it would end the waiting and suffering of families of victims." But if they met their sentence immediately, whether it be solitary or death, then they'd lack the opportunity to write a will, or do any religious action, or anything else of the sort. Now, to defend why a person's right to life ends once they take the right away from another. If you believe in an unalienable right, you must believe in it for both yourself and all other people. However, if you murder someone, you just took away their right to life, proving that you do not wish to honor such a right. If you do not honor such a right in someone else, you do not honor your own right to life. Thus, they lose their right to life. There, point defended. Continue to attack it, if you must.