It is all very well to say that many of these killers are themselves "children," that is, minors. Doubtless a nine-year-old mind is housed in that 150 pounds of unguided muscle. Grant, for argument's sake, that the misdeed is "the fault of society," trot out the broken home and the slum environment. The question then is, what shall we do, not in the Utopian city of tomorrow, but here and now? The "scientific" means of cure are more than uncertain. The apparatus of detention only increases the killer's antisocial animus . Reformatories and mental hospitals are full and have an understandable bias toward discharging their inmates. Some of these are indeed "cured" - so long as they stay under a rule. The stress of the social free-for-all throws them back on their violent modes of self-expression. At that point I agree that society has failed - twice: it has twice failed the victims, whatever may be its guilt toward the killer.
诚然，这些杀人犯中不少是没有达到法定年龄的"孩子"。无疑，这些人头脑简单，身躯庞大，有一身无法自控的力气。为辩论起见，我们姑且承认这些犯罪行为是"社会的过错"，提出家庭破裂和贫困环境所迫之理由。那么问题在于，不是在未来的"乌托邦"城市里，而是此时此地我们该怎么办。所谓"科学的"医治手段是很不可靠的，拘留机构和设施只能助长杀人犯反社会的气焰。教养院和精神病院均已满员，所以它们想让它们的"住客"离开的原因是可以理解的。这些住客中有些人是真正"治愈"了--因为对他们加强了管制。如果强调社会可以自由行事，就会使他们旧恶复发，照旧用暴力来表现自己。这样，我可以说社会又一次失败了，它至少又一次对不起受害者，不管它对杀人者应负什么责任。
As in all great questions, the moralist must choose, and choosing has a price. I happen to think that is a person of adult body has not been endowed with adequate controls against irrationally taking the life of another, that person must be judicially, painlessly, regretfully killed before that mindless body's horrible automation repeats.
对于一切重大问题，德育家必须作出抉择，而且这抉择需要付出代价。我恰恰认为，如果一个成年人对自己没有适当的控制力，而是毫无理性地毁夺他人的生命，那么对这个没有理智的人，在他重复其机械性的恐怖行动之前，就必须通过法律迫不得已地将他无痛苦地处死。