I agree. The death penalty's only justifications (overcrowding in prisons, and the cost of life sentences to the taxpayer) do nothing to tackle the ethical issue of killing another human being. I don't think an individual ever gives up his rights to life, fair trial, and humane treatment, regardless of what crime he commits. This is far too slippery a slope. On occasion, I believe, the rights of the community trump those of the individual, and in times of really, really serious need, I accept that the state has the right to take the life of its one or some of its citizens (think martial law, or war, which is the state ordering its citizens to die for it.). I don't think that overcrowding in prisons constitutes such a pressing circumstance, and as was seen above, not pursuing the death penalty actually saves money.

Why not use that money to build new prisons, or refit and re-equip old ones? It is not a civilised state that deals with overcrowding by culling.

__________________
it is a mistake to throw out the language of equal worth because of its contingent historical association with Western power.