I understand you support the death penalty (and I disagree, of course) but the death penalty was not ruled unconstitutional per se in Furman (only Brennan and Marshall wrote it's unconstitutional under all circumstances while Byron White, who was one of the most pro-death penalty justices, joined the majority). What was ruled unconstitutional were statutes, that were later modified and upheld by the very same court. That's one.
Second, are you seriously telling me that pre-Furman death penalty statues were just and appropriate? Not that current ones are great, but there are multiple major differences.
A total randomness in passing death sentences, no guidelines in sentencing, no mitigating factors, hanging juries everywhere, executions for such crimes like robbery... have you ever heard about a certain Black man in Alabama who received the death penalty in the 1950s for stealing something worth less than $2? Yes, these were pre-Furman death penalty laws.
If you support the death penalty, I strongly disagree with your positions, but I respect that. But if you're supporting all these pathologies, you're either bloodthirsty or you have no earthly idea what about historical facts.
Poll
