Killing is killing,whether the state sanctions it or not.
The only time I find it justifiable is in times of war, or in cases where certain death is hastened or made easier out of compassion.
It is my view, that if life loses respect, then taking it means little to the criminal.
Also, the criminal likely cares little about losing his/her own.
I believe the State is responsible for the lack of respect for life and property, since it seems to have little respect either.
As to criminals, they are punished far worse by imprisonment and loss of basic rights. Death is the easy way out for them.
Why do you want to keep evil killers on the planet?
Have you heard about the Texas Connally prison incident about five years ago, which resulted in the murder of policemen by the fugitives? How will you ensure that these men do not kill again, except by removing them by the death penalty?
The penalty for murder, as all killing, should not be "punishment." It should be a protection for the rest of us from a threat by a killer. I'm more than willing to impose lesser penalties where the public is not at risk. But, what to do about proven killers who are not bound by any prohibition to kill?
The boy in question bragged that he killed the woman (by covering her eyes and then her entire face with tape and then throwing her in water so that she drowned) because she saw his face when he broke in to rob her and then kidnapped her.
He killed in order to escape what would have been a lesser penalty. How will you protect society from this person?