I rather think he missed the point where I proved the death penalty was wrong, even.
A man got a new hunting dog, and went out to shoot ducks. He shoots a duck, and it falls in a lake. His dog walks across the water, retrieves the duck, and brings it back to him. Shocked that his dog can walk on water, he shoots another duck, and again, the dog walks across the lake to retrieve it.
The next day, he asks a buddy to go hunting with him, wanting him to see what his dog can do. Shortly after arriving near the lake, he shoots a duck. The dog walks across the waters of the lake, and retrieves the duck. He shoots several more ducks, and several more times the dog walks across water to retrieve them. The buddy never says a thing about this dog.
Finally able to stand it no longer, the man asks his friend, "Don't you think there is something unusual about my dog?"
"The State"? Really? That's the perfect defense for the coward who kill another human being, it wasn't me, it was "the state"
It's also the perfect defense for one who is not a coward. That is why the system works as it has and has worked that way since we had legal systems. When King Hammurabi proscribed the death penalty, it was not his hand who wielded the sword. It's basic human psychology. I understand Hexi not understanding that, but you certainly should. One cannot be judge, jury, and executioner without ill effect to one's psyche. Why? Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It's a mental construct, yes, for the state to employ an executioner, but one whose purpose is to leave the non-criminals involved in the punishment of actual criminals psychologically unscathed by the process.