I understand MM's view 100%. I also really understand the word hardwired. Because I feel hardwired in the other direction. There are lots of people that I can't regret the deaths of. But not sure I can think of anyone that should be killed.

It is a complex feeling even when you are firmly on one side.

McMartin Preschool.

IJS.

He's not claiming this is virtuous or fair, just what he wants.

Yeah, again...my viewpoint is not "right". It is not compassionate, equitable, or even just. It just is what it is.

And there is an appeal process in "my" system. Just not a long-drawn out "Okay, maybe NINE strikes and you're out" sort of system.

Also, I think Allyson's post is a very good one...and her personal experience example doesn't really speak to what I'm saying. I agree that what the person who carjacked her got was fair and just.

But if he'd killed her instead of stealing her car and badly frightening her...my opinion would be different. And it would be "five years is not enough. A hundred years is not enough. This man should be dead now. Thank you."

I read Allyson's post differently. I read it more as someone who thought the justic system worked.

I read Allyson's post differently. I read it more as someone who thought the justic system worked.

No, that's how I read it, too. I mean...I guess what I'm saying is my line is very clear and very rigid. Murder. Rape. Children. Cross that line and all that awaits you is a very quick end. When I said her personal experience...and I was referring solely to the carjacking...I meant that her attacker didn't cross that line and so it didn't speak to my defined limit. If that makes any sense.

It's...okay. I have a cousin, he's a few years younger than me. He had a little sister. One day something in his head snapped and he came home, loaded a rifle (my uncle, his father, was a policeman and an avid hunter) and waited. His sister was the first to come home. He shot her in the head and killed her.

He's sick. I mean truly sick...he's on anti-psychotics because during the whole trial and whatnot he was so delusional he would walk into walls attempting to go down hallways that weren't there. He's ill, I get that.

He will be in prison for a very very very long time.

But, gods help me and I hate myself more than a little for this, there is a part of me that would rest easier knowing he was dead.

Because, see...he's still out there. He'll get out one day and maybe he won't take his meds or...anyway. He can't be "fixed", not to the point anyone can say 100% "He will never do this again." And if he were in the ground I could say "He will never do this again."

I know it's wrong, okay? I'm not attempting to sway anyone towards saying "Hmmm...he's got a point, he does." I should be more compassionate and I should be less reactionary and I should be less fearful.

But I'm not. I love my cousin and wish that he could be fixed so that I would never fear him again. I wish that I could look forward to the day he meets Emeline and not want to snatch her away from him or worry that he knows where she lives or something stupid like that. I wish I could find it in my heart to hope that he will be well and to trust that he will be safe...for others and from himself.

But, just as he is a monster, so am I. And my monster would rest better were he as removed as a person can be from this world.

In my system there would be *one* appeal and it would have to happen within one year of sentencing. If the appeal didn't work, or you missed the deadline...

When your daughter is unjustly accused of a violent crime, I'll be with you on the sidewalk protesting to let her free. As long as you haven't managed to have any say with your incredibly wrong-headed approach to justice. Because then, since overworked, under-resourced people made mistakes, she'd be dead. That would suck.

As long as you haven't managed to have any say with your incredibly wrong-headed approach to justice.

This is why I'm not in charge.

• shrug* What do you want? I said over and over again that it's a minority opinion and that I know it's not what I should aspire to. You call me wrong-headed...okay. That's your opinion.

And I will freely admit that if my daughter is wrongly accused of a crime I will be the first to embrace hypocrisy and protest for her release. And I'll be happy you're there.

So, since I'm trying to be civil and keep the tone of my posts very particularly about me with as many caveats as I can toss in there...wanna back off with the near-ad-hominem "wrong headed" type remarks, bucko?

JohnSweden I think you are being unfair to Miracle. He is not advocating a position; he is describing an emotional reaction. That is, I'm presuming if an initative to implement what he is saying - one trial, one appeal, on shot - implemented in our actual system he would vote against. Actually something like that has been introduced. There is a "reform" being introduced in the Federal legislature that would eliminate almost all death penalty appeals. The idea is that the state courst are so perfectly fair and just, it is not neccesary in most cases for Federal appeals to be heard.

So, since I'm trying to be civil and keep the tone of my posts very particularly about me with as many caveats as I can toss in there...wanna back off with the near-ad-hominem "wrong headed" type remarks, bucko?

Sure, just playing monsterball with you, friend. People get not only wrongfully accused, but wrongfully convicted of the sort of crimes you're suggesting KGB bullets for, all the time. Often. Many. Not maybes, or we think he did it. That guy did and should burn. Except, whoops, cops got a little too focused. DNA lab messed up. Evidence chain was contaminated. We'll just kill the ones we're really sure of. Except, a dozen years later, we get unsure of some of those cases. We don't have the right to make mistakes like that, you and I and our system, that we fund and staff, and purport to be fair and even-handed. We have to get it right, or be in a position to set it straight. Apologetic letters to the widows and families aren't good enough, in my once-removed view.

I don't imagine you're telling him anything he doesn't already know -- the magic of an emotional reaction is that it doesn't respond automatically to reason. At least he's not mistaking it for logic and rightness.

As ita says, these are things I know, John.

Obviously I've touched a nerve with you. So, since I've been using a reasoned approach to describing non-reason, and you're using an entirely emotional approach to addressing your reasoned arguments...mayhaps we should end the discussion. Until such a time when we can both approach it the same way. That is to say...reasonably.