Yes, in accordance with the US-Italy extradition treaty.
Yes, she should be imprisoned somewhere, but maybe in the US.
No, Americans shouldn't be extradited to foreign nations even if they're guilty.
No, she isn't guilty.
From what I have seen, she should NOT be sent back. for one, double jeopardy. and 2.. from what I have seen and read about the trial, there was not enough evidence for a conviction. Correct me if im wrong, but wasnt it someone other guys handprint and dna all over the place where the murder took place?
E Pluribus Unum
I am sure if AD had been paid to defend the likes of Charles Manson, he would have argued his clients case, that's what Lawyers are paid to do, in terms of Knox he isn't been paid to defend her and can be impartial.
There are many places in Europe with an overall higher quality of life than in the United States (Quality-of-life Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), and nearly everywhere in the EU beats the US in several important factors, like healthcare, life expectancy, infant mortality, food safety, crime statistics, welfare provision and public services, including transport.
So, you are just factually, objectively wrong if you think the US has a higher quality of life than anywhere in Europe. This is simply factually inaccurate.
Furthermore, several European nations do keep the provision of overthrow of the government if it becomes tyrannical, and in fact one of those nations, France, is way better at it than you, having done so happily and bravely multiple times over the course of their history, while you only managed to do it once, and even then only because the French helped you out.
So maybe you should take some pointers from the French on how to stand up to a tyrannical government and let the people rule?
Finally, I'll address your gun issue. While it is mind-boggling to me that someone can be so cowardly and scared of their own country that they live in absolute fear unless they have a firearm with them, it is indeed possible in every single European country to own firearms -- yes, even in Britain. Rifle licenses are cheap and easy to obtain, and shotgun licenses are a dime a dozen. These simply come with a provision: Background checks, strict registration requirements, and absolutely stringent prohibition on carrying loaded weapons around where you could cause mass destruction without good cause.
Because of the gun laws here, we don't have upwards of 50 mass shootings a year. We don't have tens of thousands of our citizens dead in shootings, drive-by's, accidental discharges or friendly 'accidents' every year. I enjoy hunting and shooting as a sport -- I go to the range, where I keep my rifle (though I could keep it locked up at home, if I so wished), and fire it at the range as much as I like. Or I could drive up half an hour outside the city and shoot clay pigeons, which I do regularly. Or I could grab a hunting license and shoot game, if I had the mind to do so.
What I can't do is walk into a school and blast 27 little children with concealed weapons and automatic rifles. Frankly, you're a fool and a monster if you believe this sort of behaviour should be implicitly condoned by the government by allowing anyone to own such weapons.
To finish, I reiterate my point that you've got a warped and sad view of the world around you, and I think you could benefit from some more unbiased study of the ways other places do things.
After all, your country isn't perfect. If it was, you wouldn't be here debating today.
BTW us white folks who don't associate with inner city drug traffickers have lower rates of gun violence than most white Europeans
I love all the Europe vs America debates. They're so productive.