Earlier I made a post that because of it's length many will pass over but included in it was the reasons for the death penalty. This was one of them.
You are welcome to your opinion, of course. Clearly it brought closure to you, and that's fine. But I would argue that you shouldn't assume that your particular feelings apply to everyone else, which is what you seem to suggest. There have been plenty of victims who actively advocated against the death penalty for the perpetrator of the crime. The reasons are diverse, but this only serves to prove the point that the death penalty doesn't bring the universal closure to victims that you claim it does.
But anyways, this is a sidenote in my post. My point wasn't that the death penalty is good or bad, or whether we should have or not have it. It is one of those topics where reasonable people will differ, and each will have his or her own good reasons for their opinion. Ultimately, it's a very personal thing, and support or opposition depends on one's convictions, outlook and moral code.
As I said, to me, there are crimes for which the death penalty "
feels" like the only appropriate punishment, but one that would, if it were up to me, only be applicable in the most egregious cases with indisputable evidence. I understand that this might limit the applicability of the death penalty and might not agree with your particular viewpoints, but such is life.
I will point out again that if we, as a society, decide to have the death penalty as a punishment for certain crimes, beyond ensuring that it's applied carefully to avoid executing innocent people, we shouldn't transform it into a virtual "life in prison" sentence by a process of perpetual and never-ending appeals. I support appeals to higher Courts for legitimate reasons, but there comes a point when appeals are exhausted, and that point shouldn't be four decades after the original conviction.