Justice Stevens Gets It

From the Baze v. Rees opinion (as highlighted by Sentencing):

The thoughtful opinions written by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and by JUSTICE GINSBURG have persuaded me that current decisions by state legislatures, by the Congress of the United States, and by this Court to retain the death penalty as a part of our law are the product of habit and inattention rather than an acceptable deliberative process that weighs the costs and risks of administering that penalty against its identifiable benefits, and rest in part on a faulty assumption about the retributive force of the death penalty.

[emphasis mine]

While the death penalty has incredibly high costs for no consclusive return, not to mention the unique act of the government taking an already detained life, there is a remarkable lack of scrutiny surrounding the death penalty and its use. Sure, it's uncomfortable to talk about the death penalty, but if we can't talk about it and its various flaws, should we really be allowing it to continue on its present course unchecked?