STATE sponsored killing by a democratic government makes the conscious taking of the life of another human appear acceptable, whereas it never is.

This applies both to the death penalty (Letters, November 17) and to the proposed military intervention in Syria.

We can expect MPs who have to make a conscious personal decision to condone the taking of life to make sure that they acquaint themselves fully with the facts.

On the death penalty, it is statistically clear that in those states that retain it, the murder rate is higher not lower than countries such as the UK where it has long been repealed.

Similarly it is no surprise that the terrorists in Paris claimed to be acting to revenge armed intervention by the French Government against militias they support. Only a fanatic ignores the likely effects of the premeditated taking of life.

Maurice Vassie, Deighton, York