Another moronic point argument is that because "life" sentences turn out to only be 15-20 years, that means we should use the death penalty. Where does this polarised notion that people against the death penalty must automatically support current judicial practices come from? 15-20 is not life, and is not acceptable. This makes actual life an actual alternative to support that is not the death penalty.
__________________
| (• ◡•)| (❍ᴥ❍ʋ)
|