In the sea of daily news, the death penalty occasionally catchesa big wave of attention when a convicted murderer’s series ofappeals finally run out and it is time for him to face the ultimatepunishment.

Such was the case in Mississippi last week with the execution ofJohn B. Nixon Sr. and in California recently with the execution ofCrips streets gang co-founder Stanley “Tookie” Williams. Nixon, 77,was put to death for his role in the 1985 death of Virginia Tuckerand Williams, 51, for the 1979 robbery murders of four Los Angelescitizens.

Both cases brought out the expected crowds of death penaltyprotesters.

In another example of how Hollywood is out of touch with therest of America, some celebrities rallied to Williams’ side becauseof his supposed redemption as a children’s book author preachingagainst gangs. We question, though, how much influence theco-founder’s words have had on his notorious gang since hisincarceration.

Furthermore, Govs. Haley Barbour and Arnold Schwarzenegger werecriticized for denying clemency to the condemned men. Both stateleaders said they could not substitute their judgement for those ofthe juries that convicted the men – based on trial evidence – orthe appellate courts that upheld the verdicts.

But in favor of leniency, that is exactly what death penaltyopponents want to do themselves.

They try to claim a moral high ground in saying the deathpenalty is “barbaric” and has no place in a “civilized” society. Itmust be pointed out, however, that death by lethal injection is farless barbaric than any of the deaths endured by Nixon’s orWilliams’ victims.

Support of the death penalty is not evidence of a”blood-thirsty” society.

It is merely a belief that some criminals – once properlyconvicted and finally adjudicated as guilty – deserve the ultimatepunishment. That is what happened in the cases of John B. Nixon Sr.and Stanley “Tookie” Williams.