i think im more inclined to agree with rufie.
1) for starters, i dont get the idea of killing someone because they, say, killed someone else. just seems like backwards logic, and that makes the judge / jury as morally wrong as the killer in question (and, perhaps even worse if the sentance is passed for something other than murder -- tho im not even sure if thats possible).
2) the supporting claim that its "quicker and cheaper" is also wrong, as the sentance usually takes quite a few years to pass thru, as well as MILLIONS in law / court expenses, tying up the legal system even further.
3) to me... like rufie says, it seems like a quick escape. you do somethin wrong, they kill ya. quick, done. i think its a harsher crime to know that a 30 year old man could spend 70, even 80 years, well over 25,000 days, in the same room! day in, day out, over and over, he's trapped, encaged like an animal left with nothing but guilt and remorse for the rest of those days.
plus, the extra added benefit of having the crap kicked outta you (or raped into you) on an hourly basis.
certainly sounds like a more painful, more horrible hell to me.
