[ASL]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

Not in the question that was being discussed. You are adding additional "what ifs" to the question.

Your question was the "what if?" It was posited in response to a question about feelings on the resumption of federal executions. To answer your "what if?" directly, I suppose I should say my answer is... no. I don't think they would (be more careful). There may already be consequences, even criminal consequences, for gross misconduct. Sovereign immunity, as extended to individual actors, is not absolute. Indeed, it is described as qualified immunity, the operative word being qualified.

To the broader question (the one presented by the OP), I have not posed a what if, I have simply explained my... feelings on the danger such "solutions" as yours (my concerns layered on top of others' concerns about the innocent being executed) pose. It seeks to solve what I view as a systemic problem with enhancing individual consequences. It seems to be predicated on the idea that, not only are there are bad actors out there (I'm sure there are), but that the problem is that we just don't have the means to "punish" them enough to stop them from being bad. I think that is 1) only partially true in terms of the extent to which likelihood of punishment is diminished and 2) the sort of people who would be dissuaded by punishment--the people who know they are doing wrong and just don't care so long as they can keep out of prison--will almost certainly represent a vanishingly small portion of the population. The people were are actually dealing with believe they are doing everything right, that they are good people doing a good job, zealously representing "we the people" and so threat of punishment for doing "wrong" will not dissuade them from doing wrong--at least no more than it will dissuade anyone else who believes they are doing "right" (that is, it may dissuade anyone and everyone from even attempting to do the job, whether they would be a good actor or a bad one) because they don't recognize or believe that they are doing wrong: they think they are doing good.

We were discussing innocent persons being executed, not how anyone got to death row.

You may be, but this thread is broader than that. At the risk of alienating some of my fellow travelers, I daresay I think it is a mistake to be drawn into a "what if?" discussion relating to the risk of innocent people being executed. Because 1) as I have stated, it's kind of moot since the death penalty comes after guilt or innocence (okay, "not guilt") has been determined in a court of law. There is a presumption of guilt when the death penalty is applied, and 2) the problem is not really unique to the death penalty. I mean, if that's your argument for why the death penalty is bad--"What if an innocent person is executed?"--with the presumption that the death penalty is uniquely irrevocable... I disagree. All punishment is irrevocable. Someone spends five years in prison? That's irrevocable. You can't give them their five years back, even if they are later exonerated and even if they were serving a life term. Sure, they don't have to spend the rest of that term in prison, but what term they did serve cannot be undone. And indeed, some would argue (I mean, I won't, because I disagree, but some would) that it's actually worse to have to spend decades in prison for a crime one did not commit than to have to be put to death swiftly soon after conviction (not that we've been able to do that for a very long time in the US).

I think it's a much stronger position to hold that justice entails more than simple guilt or innocence, and that where the death penalty fails most consistently is in terms of its biased, often poorly considered, application. When we get down to debating on the grounds of guilt or innocence, we cede too much ground to the death penalty advocates.

Feel free to discuss your concerns here, but that's not something I care to venture into personally.

I appreciate your being so magnanimous about allowing me to post on topic in this thread. I understand if you choose not to respond further to me.