If it were, it would show how standardisation of crime ar personal discretion operates to disadvantage certain persons, and contort the rule of law. I'm concerned by the way in which many people try and validate arguments by contorting definitions of manner of death. Well, there is, but only in a semantic, and legalistic sense. Murder is illegal at law, as it is an act against the people and public safety, at law. The law in Bahraine for theft, is for ones hand to be amputated - a sanctioned punishment in that country.
Execution operates in much the same way.
I think it is quite unproductive to argue the semantics of defining murder and execution, because at the end of argument, there are a couple of realities which supersede any petty semantic. I'm glad this community recognises the potential for the conservative powers amongst us to rise up and bring our civilised country backwards.