Let’s use another example: The famous Ford Pinto case involved Ford executives looking at the cost of making pintos gas tanks that would not explode versus the cost of the occasional judgment when it blew up and fricasseed a family.
Do the execs deserve to die? That is a moral question as well as a legal question. Legally, there is no death penalty for that. I guess it might fit somewhere in the negligent homicide category, which is not a death penalty crime.
Now, morally, would I shed a tear if someone whose family died in a Ford Pinto gas tank fire had shot one of those assholes? No I would not. So with all due respect, I think you are conflating the issues somewhat and turning our absence of moral reprehension upon learning of their deaths into a mistaken belief that we want people to shoot and kill those assholes.
We are not saying folks should, we are just saying it’s understandable if people do, as it sounds like a resolution that is chock full of wonderful karma from a non-legal standpoint.