As to keeping someone alive simply on the off chance that there was a shadow of a doubt... again, I'm not imprisoning people at all unless I have confidence in the system.
Having confidence in the system is one thing, of course there needs to be confidence in the justice system. However, no model or system of justice is perfect. We know people get wrongly convicted. That's just a fact of being human, errors happen.
This is not something one can get rid of, so it needs to be taken into consideration when setting up the system. We know a certain percentage of people who end up in jail or in death row are innocent, and we have to account for this possibility somehow.
Now as I said, the only way to make absolutely sure no innocents ever get executed by the state is to not have executions at all. This is why it has become the norm of justice in the most of the rest of the world outside the US.
You either have confidence in the system or you don't.
Having confidence in the system does not mean one has to at the same time believe/assume and act as if the system is flawless and makes no erroneous judgements ever.
If you convict, then you need to own it. If you don't then let him go.
Yes, and if you later find out you've convicted wrongly, you need to equally own up to it and let him go. If you execute and execute wrongly, you've just killed an innocent man and there's no recourse you can offer him/her whatsoever.
Give him to me and if he did terrible things then there is a good chance I'm going to put him down. So... do you care about this precious human life enough to save it?
No I won't and yes I do. Which is precisely why we do not extradite people to states and nations in which they might face the capital punishment, and neither do most other countries in the European Union.
As to capital punishment being too expensive, not really. It only expensive because the cases have about a million appeals and people on death row draw it out endlessly even if they're guilty as sin because it means they stay alive longer.
How come then, even as a result of this massive process you have people who are innocent being released from death row? Clearly the system is dysfucntional in that even with the 'million appeals' it is not successful in rooting out all of the innocent people, and you want to make it simpler? Remember, all of these people have been convicted originally 'beyond reasonable doubt', and all of them were 'guilty as sin' before it was discovered that they actually weren't.
I'll wait 12 months AFTER conviction. That is generous and patient. I am agreeing to hold a man convicted beyond a shadow of a doubt for 12 months on the chance that some new evidence will come up
Most of the people who have been released as innocent have been released far, far after 12 months in death row, so clearly drawing a line at 12 months will only serve to increase the amount of people being wrongfully executed and make the issue worse.
See, my response to your notion that I can't kill him because his life is sacred is that I'm going to put him on a plane and send him to your country. You can take care of him.
You can kill him, it's your country and your laws. I'm saying that I do not agree with those laws, and would not turn over a man to be executed. If you can somehow convince the US authorities to ship the people on death row to Europe because your sense of humanity is at the level of a bronze aged tribesmen sure I'll take 'em. Won't be holding my breath though.
And to conclude, you have not convinced me that you have a legal system that is capable of not imprisoning innocent people. If you can't keep yourself from imprisoning innocent people then you really shouldn't be throwing people in jail at all... no?
At no point did I claim any justice system is perfect anywhere, nor have I been saying at any point that justice systems don't convict innocent people. I'm saying, for the last time that because false convictions are unavoidable in every justice system, there should not be a possibility of accidentally killing someone innocent, and in practice the only way to ensure this is to abolish the death penalty like most countries have already done.
Your argument is that you do not want to spend resources on providing life imprisoned inmates with basic necessities so you're willing to pay the price of occasionally someone who's done nothing wrong being killed by the State. To me this is is unfathomably stupid and immoral logic.
You imprison me and you're killing me one day at a time.
Yes, but to repeat: being killed one day at a time is, at least to me and everyone else with half a brain, preferable to being killed instantly. I cannot give you back the years spent behind bars, but I can give you back the rest if your remaining life, something which is impossible after you've falsely executed someone.
You've keep pretending this makes no difference, or maybe you genuinely believe it doesn't, I don't know. In either case, you're wrong.