@elbanditoroso
#1 – This doesn’t count, because we’re not discussing death penalty vs not death penalty. You and I are discussing your proposal that criminals have done to them what they did to their victim(s). This isn’t relevant in any way.
#2 – This is the deterrence argument. Do you really believe that deterrence works or would work if we only reinstated the rack an other torture devices? Do you have any evidence or is it just a gut feeling? But more importantly, are you saying that people will only keep from committing horrible crimes because they don’t want to face a state that would do the same? Is this a religious thing? Is there how you view ethics? Carrot/stick? How come violent crime rates are decreasing along side execution rates?
#3 – I’m not sure what to say here. Your really think that we all benefit by increasing brutality? If someone I loved was kidnapped, raped, and killed, I would want to find the person, keep them in my basement, and go at them with power tools for the next 50 years. We have a state to protect people from me – and me from me. There is no such thing as closure, but there is such a thing as me destroying me by committing violence. What kind of mad max sociopath dystopian society are we talking about here? And why are you advocating for it?
Some of this comes down to math.
violence + violence = 2x violence
If we care above violence, we care about reducing it. I’m not sure if it gets any simpler than that.