[billybob]

Yes, judges and juries are also flawed humans. But by that logic, executing a justice system at all shows arrogance. If you have convictions, try as you might, you will have some false convictions.

Imagine you have convicted someone of multiple cold-blooded murders and believe they would murder again. You realize that it's possible the conviction was in error, but you've done your best to investigate, present and argue the evidence, and the jury was unanimous.

What now? Imagine you keep this person in jail for 70 years until their death. Was that kinder than executing them? Is it worse to die, or to live every day in captivity for 70 years? Yes, you retained the ability to reverse the conviction while they were alive, but that ability has an expiration date. Once they're dead, you have given them a life of suffering instead of death. Even if you reverse the conviction during their life, you may have deprived them of decades of free life. You can't give that back.

This issue is tricky. I can respect opinions on both sides. And I don't think it helps to say "my opponents in this debate are arrogant."

[za]

My bad.