I'm completely against it. I find it to be hypocritical and useless, not to mention the fact that applying it means eventually killing an innocent, as the judicial system is inherently imperfect, as we all humans are. One innocent alone is too much for me.
It's hypocritical because the same system that defends the value of life, arguing that killing is wrong regardless of the reason (with the sole exception of self-defense), ends up killing people systematically in the name of "justice", with the excuses of "balancing things out", saving money and/or making an example of it. All excuses that many criminals could argue in their defense...
It's useless because it doesn't do anything to repair the damage done, just satisfy a (in my opinion, negative) desire of revenge people might have, with the notions of being a deterrent and/or a way to save money being rather questionable at best. And if the latter were actually true, it wouldn't be a valid excuse to me, as I don't put a price in someone's life. It really seems some people nowadays have forgotten that the economy is supposed to work for us, not us for it...
The way I see it, the purpose of punishment regarding the law should be to prevent further damage and rehabilitate the infractor as much as possible. To be positive and productive, rather than an institutionalized form of revenge to satiate society's bloodthirst. To lead by example, rather than by fear or force. And if the loss of freedom is not enough deterrent to prevent crime, then maybe it's time to truly focus on dealing with the actual issues that cause violence, instead of just continuing to follow the same tired strategy, trying to come up with more deterrents which end up inflicting as much pain and suffering as the actions we seek to end.
