Both punishment and terrorism are viewed as purposeful violence. Terrorists defend the taking of lives for the greater good and social utility is the justification of punishment. This article attempts to make this comparison instructive. These instrumentalist justifications are typically immoral. The difference between criminal justice punishment and terrorists is one of degree not kind. This argument is divided into three parts: (1) defines terrorism and examines it from instrumentalist and more perspectives; (2) examines the concept of moral standing, explaining why and how it matters whether you practice what you preach about violence and morality; and (3) critiques the heavy reliance of our criminal justice system on utilitarianism. A lesson learned from the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, should be a more familiar understanding of the dangers of instrumentalism and the need to recognize those dangers in our criminal law.