Why couldn't the red line be imprisonment? I understand and recognize the strong difference in deterrent between the two but at what cost. Trusting the government to get things right in a situation that's one and done doesn't inspire much faith for me.
Discussion
1. Expensive.
2. Familes deserve swift justice.
3. Yes, today's govs are hopelessly corrupt, making this a thorny issue.
The corrupt government also makes it more expensive to execute than if we just locked them up and fed them. Lawyers profiting the whole way for their time. Looking at areas of the world with less civil rights will certainly be cheaper but again at what cost to the liberty of the people.
This is where I hit my thorny side of not being for execution as well. I can never imagine someone harming someone close to me and watching them live their life. Knowing they'd be locked away would be a semblance of Justice but that's never going to whet a family member's desire for revenge.
Interestingly enough I romanticize people like Gary Plauché for chosing to forego their own civil liberties for times they feel Justice still needs to be served. I can certainly understand the need for Justice but having the State be the applicator of such means will never sit right with me.