Reply #38: Well yeah - streamlining the process would help...

[We_Have_A_Problem]

As far as your suggestions, the problem is, you're equating reasonable doubt with all possible doubt, and the two are very different.

Yes, i am fully aware of the risk (as small as it is) of executing an innocent man, but there is also the plain fact that by letting these scum file appeal after appeal after appeal, seeking the slightest obscure technicality or even misprint of a document as an excuse to let them free, what you end up doing is making a mockery of justice.

What about their victim's families? Why should they have to be put through decades of seeing the killer of their loved one filing appeal after appeal at taxpayer's expense?

Reasonable doubt is just that - reasonable. To me, if the number or people who have to say you're guilty and deserve to die have all agreed that is the case, then the "reasonable" standard has been meet. Give them one appeal to review the legal procedures and make sure nobody was paid off, and upon that appeal, take them out back and put some lead in their brain.

Cold? Yep. Borderline barbaric? Sure is. Do i feel guilty about it? Not one damned bit. 99.9999% of the people on death row are pure scum. Removing them from society is the best possible solution.

The only alternative I could accept would be banishment, but to where would you send them?