No!
Worst part is that you can't take it back when later on it's clear that the person is innocent
It outlived it's use when it started to get "humane" ways to kill the deathrow inmates. They where originally meant to both scare and embarass potential criminals with an extremly painful, public death, but the way it plays out nowadays this just doesn't work anymore - and can't, as even proponents of death penalty are againt those torturing preactices.
Up until the 18th century a death punishment was also meant to be a very embarassing public torture: Short drop hangings, where the victims would not only slowly suffocate, but also loose the control over their muscles and ending up with bot an errection and literally shitting their pants, braeking wheels, where the victims got slowly beaten to death, brazen bulls where the victims got cooked to death, their screams being heard through the mouth of the bronze bull in an amplified and distorted way, boiling, which is essentially the same, exept the victim gets fried as well, the slow fights to death and agony in the coliseums in the roman empire... you get the idea.
It was a scaretactic, but it doesnt work that way anymore. A normal prison sentence is much more humiliating nowadays than a death sentence.
Also, if we kill a killer, aren't we technically killers too, and deserve death sentence in consequence? What makes murdering a killer better than than the murder(s) he comitted?
