Exile to an island somewhere seems a good solution, but just where do we find two islands, or maybe four?

Exile to a desert region might work also, but who guards the perimeter?

What would be the punishment for trying to get out?

OSW>> All my adult life I've strenuously argued against the reintroduction of capital punishment, that is until now<<

OSW I do not believe that the “State” has the right to murder their citizens...... on principal, Judeo Christian principals. DNA has seen a plethora of state murder victims cleared after their executions.

Agronomist ended this argument with this succinct line, “ if murder is wrong, judicial murder cannot be right.”

“ if murder is wrong, judicial murder cannot be right.”
sonofgloin,
You have a lot of waking up to do. Firstly, no-one is advocating murder, we're talking about preventing it in case you hadn't noticed.
The death penalty can only be classified as murder if the judge or jury are so bent that they corroborate into sentencing an innocent. It can happen & it has happened but nowadays with cameras everywhere, DNA & other hi-tech it would be an extremely risky thing to do.
Those who are against such punishment better come up with an alternative soon because people have had a gutful of the present sentencing laws.

"Agronomist ended this argument with this succinct line, "if murder is wrong, judicial murder cannot be right."

I agree heartily with this, judicial murder is always wrong, but Judicial Murder is not the same as Legal Execution.

I do wish that we'd all start using common English.

"...but Judicial Murder is not the same as Legal Execution."

Only to the extent that Judicial Execution is not the same as Legal Murder, but maybe the confusion is with the concept of extra-judicial execution?

"I do wish that we'd all start using common English."

Or correct English, Is Mise.

In which case what is being discussed should most correctly be described as premeditated killing.

I must apologise for my inability to choose words that clearly convey my thoughts on (a) Capital Punishment and (b) Destruction of those engaged in terrorism.

I totally oppose Capital Punishment for all classes of criminality. Convicted criminals must have two elements to their offence (i) mens rea (the criminal intent) and (ii) the actus reus (the criminal act). Therefore, the old legal maxim should apply; '...an act does not make a person guilty unless his mind is guilty...'

With this terrorists 'filth', their acts of killing are quite unlike that of a normal murderer. Though there exists an 'actus reus' there's a general absence of 'mens rea'. They (terrorists) simply kill because of some esoteric devotion to their God - to exterminate the infidel, all non-believers and those who've committed the unspeakable crime of apostasy of Islam ?

In the normal criminal sense, the proofs for homicide that need to be covered by detectives are relatively easy ? They are;
'malice aforethought' (express or implied) and 'a death' at the hands of the accused individual.

I'm sure most of you can see there's a precise and indisputable contrast between the two. The ONLY way to effectively deal with terrorism, is to stamp it out - much like a 'pest controller' would deal with any form of dangerous pestilence ? I'm certainly NOT advocating a re-introduction of Capital Punishment for criminals.