In a message dated 5/15/00 8:20:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

>
>  Who said anything about rationalising murder?  I'd suggest that the
>  majority of victims of state-supported murder come from the lower class -
>  low socio-economic status, if you prefer.  I'd suggest that rich murderers
>  can not only afford better lawyers, but are also more likely to be seen as
>  pillars of society, who couldn't possibly be executed.  This may be because
>  they're closer to having common class backgrounds to the judges imposing
>  death penalties.

   Well, of course the socio-politically powerful do not get the same
treatment as the majority.  But to be fair they almost never commit capital
murder either.  By the same token, they commit such an infinitesimally small
amount of murder, none of which really impacts common folk such as you and
me, that they are irrelevant to our well being or to the topic at hand.

>  This is the heart of arguments which state that the death penalty is
>  applied unfairly.

    The problem with the argument of 'fairness' is that life is not a cricket
match and those who support having murderers executed consider it to be fair
and just even if some murderers do avoid such consequences.  The overwhelming
majority of those murdered are of the working class and the overwhelming
majority of those who commit murder are also of the working class.  An appeal
to 'fairness' is simply not a convincing argument.
Yours,
Issodhos