Death Penalty Continued...

Some have argued that it is juries, not the government, that sentence defendants to death and  therefore Conservatives can trust the results and not think about the government aspect.

However, the jury generally only sees the evidence provided by the government. Few defendants can compete with the government financially to provide counter evidence or exculpatory evidence. Crime scenes are controlled by the police and evidence found there (or not found there) is due to the government. Government crime labs have had continuous scandals due to government experts falsifying reports or just doing sloppy work.

Elected judges and prosecutors are rewarded for convictions and death sentences (by reelection). They are not impartial.

And these are the same juries that most Conservatives think give wildly outrageous awards based on junk science to plaintiffs, and yet they trust them with someone's life?

Original Post:
Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Death Penalty and the Conservative View
My biggest problem with the death penalty is not that I care about the rights of a murderer, or whether it is a deterrent, or how much it costs. I simply do not trust our government enough to decide life and death. Just like I don't want the government to be in charge of my health care, retirement, or sexual choices, I don't want the government to choose life and death, where the inevitable mistake is one that can never be corrected.

I have never understood why those with a view of government as being inept, corrupt, and parochial would then insist that it should have the power to kill.