Asklemmy

i'm not against killing per se. you can kill in self defense for example and be excused. people can kill in a war or a revolution and be excused. in a perfect world, of course, people wouldn't have reasons to kill. i think the line is drawn if 1) someone massively kills or acts sadistically for chauvinistic reasons (i. e. for being part of a group of persons, not being of the right ethnicity or because they believe in some sort of pseudoscience, like anti-vaxers) 2) are or were in a position of power or high leadership 3) are at risk of returning to positions of power even after arrest (for example, they can be rescued from prison in a coup d'état by its supporters, or being pardoned by political shifts).

the regular serial killer such as manson or ed gein were not in real positions of power and were not at risk of returning to such positions, and could therefore be jailed forever. himmler, heydrich, eichmann, king leopold ii, mobutu, suharto, pretty much every latin american, african, european or asian dictator deserved to be judged with penalties up to the death penalty, and even some "democratic" leaders such us some british prime ministers and french presidents. not to say that i'm only restricting to right, i believe stalin, ceaucescu, enver hoxha and to some extent even mao should be defendants in processes that could lead up to death penalty.