I have no basic 'moral' objections to the death penalty for murder - particularly multiple murder or mass murder. For example I could not understand the concern for Saddam's 'dignity' when he was executed - the mass murdering, torturing bastard deserved everything he got. It's far more moral to have concern for the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators. I think that the often shocking asymmetry between concern for the perpetrator and concern for the victim shows that the system is really driven by atavistic 'monkey dominance' rather than morality (i.e. a victim is seen as 'weak' and hence is of no account and can be 'driven out').

Our leaders are also intensely hypocritical about killing people as well. They are quite happy to supply the likes of Mubarak and Gaddafhi with weapons and to send young men off to war, but they balk at killing murderers. I think it's because they want control over who they kill and hide behind moral posturing.

My main objection to the death penalty is that, far too often, the wrong person is executed and a poor person is much more likely to be executed than a rich person.

Finally, if we really believed that killing is wrong we would not be destroying the environment at the rate that we are doing. Ecocide is just as wicked a crime as genocide - and eventually will claim more (human) victims.