What he did was terrible because he took lives. You'd think people would realize that taking a life is terrible but unfortunately people are still happy to see this guy be put to death. How does this make sense? Why do people justify certain things just because it matches their perspective. A person who supports death is a person who supports death, period. A person or community should never make decisions on another persons life based off of human perception. People just love to think that if something feels morally right then its right. This shouldn't be the practice when the human mind is so full of itself and has incredible emotional blockage. Who are we as human beings to decide the fate of another person, we can't even come up with a proper Court system, fully support our own governments/products/policies that have come to fruition since we have organized ourselves as systematical human beings.

Murder is murder, it doesn't matter if the state or individual does it. I look at it this way: If your child hits a friend, this would be the equivalent of you then hitting your child to prove how wrong that action is. When the state kills an individual, no matter what that individual has done, it sends the signal to society that killing is right, as long as you find it justified. In essence, the state continues to promote murder by having a death sentence.

A society can be soo much more than so simpleminded that murder is the only outcome we see in these cases.

That is not what I meant but I can understand why you took my post that way. Those people may have believed to be 100% sure that those individuals were guilty, but when I am talking about 100% certainty I am talking about an almost unexplainable method of assurance to determine innocence and guilt, a method that if we try to consider it's possibility of existence it would pretty much dance with the impossible. A method that surpasses the human senses and limits of what they can know and destroys any possible agenda of any person involved (witness, accused, judge, jury, lawyers, etc.) that would try to lie and aim in declaring wrongfully someone as guilty or under innocence.

I am talking about omniscience level method here.

A method such as that one is impossible now and most likely always will.

I would try to appeal to a science-fiction method but Minority Report even fucked that one for me.

To put it simpler: if we could know the truth of whether someone killed and innocent person/people, the truth, I would be ok with the death penalty but since that is impossible then I can't support it. Even simpler: we can't know for sure whether someone killed an innocent person so I can't support it, but if we could, then kill them all.

Human rights wouldn't allow to keep he shut in a 1 sqmt cell alone for life, all dark and Just enough food to keep him alive but always famine. Or handcuffed and drugged to paranoid and living in terror.

Perfect example of vocal minority here. The posts make it seem like most people don't agree with the death penalty. The poll shows otherwise. I think they made the right decision.

no, this is not an example of vocal minority at all

many of the posters in this thread come from outside of the US of A, where capital punishment has far lower approval rates

What? That makes no sense. The poll IN THIS THREAD shows that most people agree that he should have gotten the death penalty. However, the posts IN THIS THREAD make it seem that most people oppose the death penalty. That is literally the definition of vocal minority. Can't get any more clear cut than that.

Death Sentence = easy route out

Oh, I somehow missed that there was a poll here, I'm sorry. Given these answers I probably would have answerd "well deserved" aswell, as he got the kind of punishment he could expect in the US for what he did and his late "sorry" doesn't mean anything, yet if there was a "he deserves harsh punishment, but I can't support the death penalty out of principle" I would have voted that one.

Oh. Lol. Sorry about that then. And I voted well deserved. Because we know he's 100% guilty, I think it makes sense.