General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: On the Verdict: Revenge is a very poor substitute for justice. Discuss... [View all]Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Revenge is usually considered killing or injuring as a response to a personal injury. Our justice system entirely forecloses those having a personal relationship to a case as the deciders of guilt or penalty. This is carried quite far - for example, a person having police relatives generally would be precluded from serving as a juror on a case involving an allegation of crime against a police officer.
Whatever this is, it is not an act of vengeance. You are free to believe that the death penalty is wrong, but that doesn't make the death penalty into an act of vengeance any more than a life penalty or a shorter prison term is revenge.
And if you want to say that every criminal sentence is vengeance, than what's the point? I guess you could claim that it is, because the jurors are saying "guilty" out of a feeling of being personally harmed by these types of acts, but I don't think anyone would agree that rapists, murders, child abusers, armed robbers, etc should walk because we can't seek vengeance.
If you want to argue against the death penalty, I think you have to do a better job than misusing language.