There does exist those who represent and embody the notion of 'evil'... On the edge of the far
outer-bounds, irretrievably lost to the cause. Whether it is a case of 'pure evil'- or, a woeful shortage of
good- these people have/will commit atrocities beyond imagination.  For most, It is difficult to  
comprehend the very existence of such an individual.

In the absence of 'absolute uniformity', there will always be that, or those, who represent the outer
boundaries of that which is possible- whether positive or negative...good or evil.  It is the individual
incarnation of one who holds no regard for life and pleasures in the 'taking' where it can be found, the
outer extreme relative to human darkness.   
Off to the Chamber...

The killer is killed.  There is now one less reference point to define the outer bounds.  The 'collective'
-however incremental- gravitates in direction of the vacuum.  Was 'Justice'  the cause advanced, or was
it something else?

Do we stand in proximity to the killer when we apply to him the tools and tactics of his profession?
The 'charge'- to those who would claim affiliation in virtue- is to define the outer bounds of the
'acceptable'.  If the collective values of an alliance are subject to change in response to the ebb and flow
of external circumstances, 'moral drift'  inevitably defaults to the negative.
...if procedural modifications are required to make a practice more widely
palatable there may be something in need of further consideration,
especially if the end result is the same for all variations
Perhaps the entity of the individual is most in peril at a point the general consensus is effectively
universal relative to personal liberty and human rights.  

Within any reasonably
just society there will always exist an expanding contingency who were not
present to experience/witness the conditions just prior to this being so.  In such a society it is near
impossible to conceive conditions could ever deteriorate to place self- or, any other- at risk to suffer the
consequences of false accusations and/or arbitrary incarceration.  Yet, history reveals countless falling
civilizations acquiring these attributes...
It is within these circumstances the Death Penalty quickly becomes
embraced.  Verdicts are rendered expeditiously, while 'justice-served'
follows closely behind.  The expenses of incarceration (and all its
fixings) are avoided and there is no risk of recidivism. It is efficient,
widely supported, and entirely legal.
Perhaps it is our own liberties we protect when we insist upon just
treatment of those perceived despicable and most unlike us.

The execution of a killer conveys a strange sense of legitimacy to the very actions for which the
condemned must now die...

Over time the Death Row inmate may recognize there was no context in which their actions could be
justified; yet may also perceive of self to be on the same plane with a greater humanity.  It is this same
humanity that intermittently endorses killing as not only justified, but perhaps even necessary.  
Ultimately the condemned will head to the chamber with the consolation that many like he share in the
belief that violence is a legitimate form of expression.

It is a belief shared by billions who persistently fail to consider it may not be at all true.

regardless of form, any specific act taking life shares the same plane of
all other forms no matter how nice we are about doing it
To argue that capital punishment is a morally just consequence is to
recoginize justice can be served through sanctioned violence.
Think about it...
I mean..I could help
ya but, then we would
both stand-out