From your keyboard to God's ears. Could you be the one to pull the switch and send thousands of volts of electricity coursing through the body of a guy strapped into the electric chair until his flesh was charred? Would you fire a high-caliber rifle shot into someone's heart from close range whose eyes were blindfolded and whose hands were tied behind their back? Would you deliberately inject someone with lethal drugs who was strapped and restrained in a prone position on a gurney to the point where their heart stopped beating and they ceased to be breathing any longer? You would actually willingly kill someone who is indeed defenseless and poses no threat to anyone at the time in question? If you can answer those few questions in the affirmative, please tell me what significant distinction there is between your acts and those of the condemned killer.
Or....does it somehow insulate you from any conscionable complicity by knowing that your killing is being carried out by someone hired to do so on your behalf by the state and in the name of "justice"?
I have no argument with someone who is pro death-penalty if they freely admit that it is pure blood vengeance and that they seek death as retribution for the acts of the convicted killer. I vehemently disagree with that stance but I can most certainly understand the emotion behind it. However, those who try to justify murdering someone in the name of "justice" or anything even remotely sanctimonious are just plain WRONG in my opinion.
In my response I overlooked answering this directly. An executioner is a cog in the machine of justice...no different from a judge, prosecutor, jury or jailer.
The significant difference between a murderer and an executioner is one kills unjustly and the other does not. Now I understand that some and certainly you based on your arguments have a problem distinguishing what's just and unjust in what appear to be the same type of act. But our system of justice in order to work requires that some have the authority in their official capacity to carry out certain acts in execution of enforcement and punishment.
I realize the concept of what is "just" and "unjust" is morally different to different people so I'll just refer to what I believe as "just" as being the recognized, legal authority.
I would say though if the acts of a criminal can't be distinguished conceptually and in common sense from the acts of those charged with carrying out justice....then we
can't have a system of justice.
I'd ask, what separates a judge who fines someone from an extortioner? They both demand that people pay money at the threat of some more detrimental consequence. The distinction is one has the authority to carry out this act in his official capacity as a judge.
Jailers and kidnappers both hold people against their will. Jailers in their official capacity though have the authority to do so and that insulates them from the charges of kidnapping and/or false imprisonment.
A person who happens to carry out executions of condemned criminals doesn't have the right to murder people or effect the death of people (beyond self-defense) outside of their official capacity. All of these people are subject to the same laws we are outside of their official capacities in the justice system. But in our justice system we must grant certain authorities to some in order to effect punishment. In granting those authorities we make and accept that there is a distinction.
So I would say to you a murderer has no recognized, legal authority to take the life of another which thereby makes their actions unjust. One who effects a state execution has recognized, legal authority to do so at the behest of our justice system...thereby making their actions "just" IMO.
I must say though when it comes to vengeance...some who argue in favor of life imprisonment appear to be more bent on vengeance an infliction of anguish than those who argue in favor of the death penalty. Although it does feel lopsided to me on occasion that a cold-blooded, remorseless murderer isn't made to suffer upon death, my core belief is that sentencing a person to death is more about a reciprocity process than sadistic one...I suppose that's why we seek to do it "humanely". But hoping someone is made to suffer and anguish as a result of a lifetime in jail seems more sadistic and vengeful.:dunno:
