I'm going to have to disagree with that. Obviously the ones doing the "executing" and the ones who ok the "executing" could care less about the one they're killing either. And again - for a huge number of other reasons it makes no sense.

>It makes perfect sense. The difference is night and day.
>
>'Killing' is different than 'Executing'. Killing is done by someone who could care less about their victim. They are selfish and often not
>much more than animals preying on others,.
>
>Execution is the administration of justice.
>
>
>
>
>
>>I still think it's bizarre that anyone who thinks killing is wrong would think that its ok to kill someone for killing. Doesn't really make much sense, doesn't deter the crime as statistics prove, costs too much money, and is very inhuman. What possible advantage is there?
>>
>>>Thanks...as I said, I'm reconsidering my stance on the entire situation.
>>>
>>>If there is zero question....if the man his truly guilty, I have zero issue with execution. Those who take life in the first degree, cannot claim protection of their own life.
>>>
>>>But there are now more and more questions about convicting men who are not guilty. Even with all the advanced investigation techniques....juries (and judges) are comprised of human beings - who are not infallible and can make mistakes.