Who Does Our Killing?

    The Charleston massacre and the trial of the Colorado theater shooter have put me back in an old quandary While I am against the death penalty, I recognize that it is widely favored by people whose conscience is every bit as good as mine.
    To my ear, their arguments begin roughly this way:
     Claims that the death penalty lacks general deterrent impact are not persuasive. Yes, yes, studies say this and studies say that. But they depend on an inherently implausible notion. They purport to put a yardstick on nothingness -- to measure how often unknown persons have made unknown, inner decisions against committing a crime, with the result that nothing happened.
    And clearly, the death penalty deters the people upon whom it is visited. We can be sure that they will never repeat the crime of which they were convicted.  Recidivism will not be a problem.
    This view finds nourishment in a larger concern that our criminal justice system is a screen door against wind.  While the concern can be overblown by hotheads and political opportunists,  it is not without merit. The courts and the jails should reliably keep dangerous people off the street. They do not.
    A crusty old friend of mine would here advance one more argument:  Society should not shrink from saying that some people are just bad actors and deserve what they get.
    My friend had strong opinions and a vivid vocabulary. He liked to say we should be careful not to get so open-minded that our brains fall out. But on the matter of criminal penalties, he did have a point. Punishments have a societal value. We define our community in the rules we make. It is not merely appropriate for society to articulate ultimate prohibitions. It is important.
     Stacked against the ultimate penalty of death are familiar assertions, all true: It is capriciously applied. It falls more heavily on minorities and the poor. Innocents may be convicted.
    My own opposition is intractably simple. I try to imagine pushing the needle or flipping the switch with my own hand. I can't do it. If killing is wrong, we do not make it less wrong by hiring others to do it for us.
    The trial of the Charleston shooter is yet to come. The trial of the Colorado monster already tests our patience and our nerve. There is no doubt of his guilt. And yet the process wears on at a huge cost of time and money.
    Defense attorneys might counter that in defending the culprit they are defending the system. Whatever penalty may be levied at the end of the process, it is important to reach the end by respecting our own rules. It is important that we not be a mob.