I think there are acts that PERMANENTLY disqualify a person from participation in human society.

[colorado_ufo]

40. Just one more thought for those who oppose the death penalty in any and all circumstances:

Would you like to share a cell with him? I mean, if you yourself are incarcerated for say, robbing a liquor store in a weak and ill-thought moment of decision, would you like to be this guy's cellmate? If you said or did something that he took the wrong way, would you ever sleep at night? If you were a guard at the prison, and had to move this loser from his cell to the exercise yard or the clinic or whatever, would you not be taking a huge risk to your safety?

We can make academic and philosophic decisions regarding such matters as the death penalty, and no sane person would want an innocent person to suffer an end to his or her life. But if there is proof beyond any shadow of doubt, and the perpetrator in question is of such a savage and unrepentent nature that he or she will pose a continued threat to all other humans in contact with him or her for years to come, then the death penalty should be an option that remains for very select circumstances.

We don't remove a threat to society by placing the offender behind bars; we simply move the offender from one society to another, so that we can feel safe. Yet there are human beings in that other society, many of whom can be rehabilitated and join the outside world, but not if a fellow inmate decides to slit their throat, knowing that he or she is immune to further punishment.

We can't just send someone to prison and think, "Well, that's THAT!" Life goes on, not just for us, not just for the offender, but for all those in contact with that offender for the rest of his or her life. This is a reality that should not be ignored.