Nice to analysis but one should be hesitant to draw conclusions. Word frequency analysis lacks context. Same problem for approaches that separate words into positive and negative categories.<p>Example:<p><pre><code> I love to kill your family and the people that support my death.
God is going to come for you and all your friends and I know that even your lord Jesus will not forgive what you have done.
You will be sorry, you will see.</code></pre>
/r/dataisbeautiful has had a lot of fun with this particular dataset: <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=last+words&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=last+words...</a>
The death penalty is barbaric. The only time when a criminal should die is when they immediately threaten another person's life and there is no other safe way to stop them.<p>That's why I'm so impressed with how Norway handled Breivik after he was arrested.
> As a society, while our ethical ideal is justice, a more practically compelling priority is safety. This word, “wouldn’t,” is not compatible with our sense of safety<p>Safety is the ethical ideal, not "justice". We don't punish people because it makes us feel good or for some sense of fairness, we remove people for the good of society.<p>Edit: I'm Canadian. I know this isn't true today, but I'm glad I said it and am grateful for the replies below. I hope this statement becomes true in America one day.