As to the desirability or wisdom of utilizing the constitutional power to impose the death penalty, it is frequently asserted that there is a lack of sufficient moral justification for the imposition of the death penalty by society even when utilizing what are considered by most thoughtful individuals as proper procedures based on due process of law. I do not agree with this conclusion. The criminal justice system throughout the world is grounded on this basic concept. While there are understandable variations from society to society on the specifics of punishments, the principle remains universal. If a society chooses through established and legitimate means to impose the death penalty for an identifiable set of particularly heinous criminal behaviors, there is no principled basis on which to object other than the speciality of the punishment due to its finality insofar as the ending of a human life is concerned.
Individuals have no legitimate power to determine what is criminal or to impose punishments.
Therefore, in no principled way may the taking of a life by an individual be equated with capital punishment, nor can capital punishment be equated with murder. To conclude otherwise would require equating arrest with kidnapping. The State, when acting lawfully, may use force legitimacy where individuals may not. Thus, by the commission of specific criminal acts for which the death penalty has been previously established as a possible punishment, individuals may constitutionally be lawfully deprived of their life. I support the imposition of this penalty in narrowly defined circumstances.