I think Baron Max is being deliberately obtuse, if this is all he is saying.
To the extent that there's anything less-than-completely-straightforward about his statements, it's that he's mocking you. As he's now made explicit, even this is making a point, in Baron's gruff way: he's suggesting that your assessment of the costs of the death penalty (accidental killing of innocent people) is exaggerated, given your apparently unequal regard for the vastly larger number of lives lost due to transport infrastructure. Maybe there's a good reason to care more about the former category, but I haven't seen the argument made here. Instead there's a lot of tap-dancing around the meaning of "accidental."
Of course, there are larger rhetorical reasons for Baron to pursue such a line of argument: in order to respond honestly, you must either take the (extreme) position that all traffic deaths are unacceptable, or you must accept that the forseeable, large-scale loss of innocent lives is an acceptable price to pay for important policies. In the former case, you're reduced to a kook, and in the latter you cede the moral high ground of being "protector of the innocent," and the issue is reduced to a technical question of what the benefits of the death penalty (if any) are.
Your only other option is to avoid giving an honest response, which is probably what Baron is hoping for, as it suggests that your position on (and interest in discussing) the subject derives from something considerably less admirable than clear-eyed analysis and elevated moral concern.
I don't disagree with him on this point, if this is all he is saying. I thought he was trying to make some point in favour of the death penalty.
He did. He's stated quite clearly (and repeatedly) that he thinks society's interest in permanently disposing of certain criminals is more important than the accidental loss of innocent life associated with that process. He hasn't made a particularly compelling case for this, but it's all right there. Say whatever else you want about Baron; he doesn't mince words and he can tell when you are evading him. And, favoring direct confrontation as he does, such evasion only energizes him. It should be easy enough to present a vastly more compelling case for your position, and to avoid throwing red meat to Baron in the process, if that's what you're interested in doing.