In the words of the cook, "First, catch your hare..." No jugged hare without the hare, gen'lemen!

I would cheerfully press the button/inject the syringe/pull the lever. Not because Osama is Osama, but because I believe the death penalty can be justified (even I, a steenkin' heathen, know the difference 'twixt "Thou shalt not kill" & "Thou shalt not murder"), and should be applied, provided the crime is appropriate & the guilt is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. If there is the slightest doubt, life-means-life imprisonment, because then we can correct a mistake (if the doubt turns out to be a truth).

But is there anyone here who believes that Osama was anything other than the Guiding Light behind 9/11? His guilt, surely, is not in doubt? And I can't help feeling that, dead or incarcerated, he's a martyr & a liability either way. On the other hand, executing him saves the risk of him escaping! (I hasten to add, I'm being just a little tongue-in-cheek with the last remark!)

Sol - If you really wanted the question to be taken seriously (well, frankly, don't post it on Mudcat! ;) ), you would better have not suggested that the execution might be 'given' to a volunteer, leave alone to a relative of a 9/11 victim. For many people, judicial killing is justifiable, if unpleasant. Slaking a thirst for vengeance is hard to differentiate from murder.

Were I the Man In Charge, I would insist on carrying out sentence myself. Not from desire, or vengeance, or a sense of satisfaction; but both because I believe I could cope with the consequences (personal & emotional), & so that no-one else should have to! Never ask someone to do that which you would not...