Quote:
the OP was in no way saying that this crime is higher than other crimes, they're simply stating an opinion about this crime.
In fairness to Windy (who does have a confrontational tone to many of his posts), the OP was absolutely implying that this crime was worse than others. The title of this thread indicates that normally the OP would not support capital punishment, but because this crime is so heinous, in this case he does. The certainly implies that he views this particular crime as more egregious than all the other crimes for which he wouldn't support the death penalty.
The Byrd murder was certainly horrific. However, we have a couple just arrested for allegedly murdering their 5 year-old son after apparently abusing him for basically his whole life. We have another couple who tortured, starved, and tied up thirteen children over a period of something like 17 years. There's a guy in PA who allegedly killed a 19 year-old after she declined his marriage proposal by strangling her, snapping her neck, gouging out her eyes, and then beating her with a hatchet. We have a woman in ND who killed a pregnant woman and cut her unborn child out of the womb with a carpenters knife, then attempted to keep the baby with her boyfriend while dumping the mother's body in a river.
These are just a handful that have been in the news over the past year or two. I don't know that the Byrd murder was somehow significantly more egregious than some of those, such that a principled stance against the death penalty would be set aside for Byrd's killers but not for the others.
It's an interesting line to explore.
Slowguy
(insert pithy phrase here...)