Death Penalty Question

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

independent - voted death penalty, which I would like to see as the sole punishment for murder, but like the constitutional standard for treason, only if two or more witnesses can be provided. (Forensic evidence would be counted as only one witness, no matter how many people present it.) A lesser conviction, either for manslaughter, or with only one witness should have the punishment be life without parole, and the jury should be given the option to find that only one witness was credible, thereby making the defendant ineligible for the death penalty.  Neither rape nor pedophilia, as horrible as they are, warrant a death penalty on their own, or as special circumstance that makes a homicide a capital offense.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

Even the horrific gang-rape-turned-murder in India doesn't faze you? 

That case is not a good argument for the death penalty.  (Unless one is going to argue that gang rape in general should be subject to the death penalty.)  There was no intent to kill, just a depraved indifference to the possible effects of their actions.