@ghost-of-a-duke said
I think I can scupper your first point if I personalise the scenario. What if that innocent man was a relative of yours? Is the gain of sparing them being executed a small thing? Wouldn't you rather they went to prison and you were given the opportunity to try and vindicate them? (They are innocent after all). The argument that we simply accept a rare few of innocent ...[text shortened]... k it Utopian to explore other options to capital punishment. We do pretty well without it in the UK.
RE: paragraph 1
Depends on the relative. Some of my relatives would probably rather die than live the rest of their life in prison. As far as clearing their name myself, I am sorry to disappoint, but I'm not much of a detective.
(I note that you misstated my argument; I never claimed that execution was
better than imprisonment.)
-----
RE: paragraph 2
Didn't you say earlier that you would kill to save the life of another? If we must regard
all killing as anathema, then we do not have the option of preventative killing.
I've always wondered how a parent is supposed to refrain from any form of physical punishment with a child that is intent on hitting. You put them in 'time out', but they will not stay there. Then what? Let's say they run back over and punch their sister again. What are you going to do? Put them in an even longer 'time out'?
Maybe it will end up with the 'civilized' solution of building a little prison cell in the house and locking them in there.
I think I'd rather take the slap on the wrist.
-----
RE: Final paragraph
I also don't think it is Utopian to explore alternatives to capital punishment. I would have thought that clear from what I said earlier. Again, my argument is getting misstated.