Years ago I saw an episode on Sixty Minutes featuring a Texas lawyer, Richard "Racehorse" Haynes, who made a name for himself defending criminals. Some of them who had committed murder. In the feature it depicted a case where the defendant had unquestionably killed a man. Haynes defense succeeded in getting a not guilty plea for the guy. Afterwards when asked why he thought the jury found the man not guilty he said,"Because some people need killing."

I was going to post this in this thread with the joke about killing the terrorist that some didn't think was funny. I thought about it and decided that the topic deserved a separate thread. Some of the folks who posted in the fore mentioned thread don't think that shooting the attacker in that hypothetical is correct or necessary. Which brought Theo Van Gogh to mind. The great grandson of Vincent Van Gogh's brother Theo he was a film maker in Amsterdam.

He had made a film that was offensive to some of the Islamic persuasion. While bicycling in the city he was accosted by a radical Islamic fundamentalist and shot. According to witnesses, wounded, he tried to crawl away from his attacker and said, "Wait, let's talk."

His assailant was apparently a man of few words and he shot Theo a few more times and then slit his throat nearly beheading him. He then stabbed Theo in the chest pinning a letter of protest , or maybe a critique on the film, to the dead man's chest.

It went downhill from there with bystanders and police seriously wounded as the killer tried to escape. Unfortunately the Europeans are more civilized than their USA counterparts so the killer was sentenced to life rather than given the death penalty he so richly deserves. The point is, some people deserve to be killed and Theo's attacker is a case in point.