Which, by the way, most executions still are open to the public.
All judicial killings must be open to the public. To do otherwise allows the government to kill without the knowledge or consent of the government, in secret. That is a fundamental aspect of tyranny, and it is to be avoided.
There is room to argue whether a just government is possible, or whether any government can have the moral authority to kill one of its own citizens, but that executions must be open to the public (if they are performed) should be inarguable.
I tend to agree. The only difference is when the government intends to kill someone who is bunkered and barricaded in a defensive strong point, but intends to continue being an active threat if they escape their strong point, so the government kills them (Like with the Dallas BLM shooter, or Christopher Donner). In such a case they aren't in public, but the tactical circumstances dictate that more than anything else.
All judicial killings must be open to the public. To do otherwise allows the government to kill without the knowledge or consent of the government, in secret. That is a fundamental aspect of tyranny, and it is to be avoided.
There is room to argue whether a just government is possible, or whether any government can have the moral authority to kill one of its own citizens, but that executions must be open to the public (if they are performed) should be inarguable.
I tend to agree. The only difference is when the government intends to kill someone who is bunkered and barricaded in a defensive strong point, but intends to continue being an active threat if they escape their strong point, so the government kills them (Like with the Dallas BLM shooter, or Christopher Donner). In such a case they aren't in public, but the tactical circumstances dictate that more than anything else.