I can go on... but to answer your question in one word? Yes.
Ironically, one person from your list also had that attitude. He thought himself qualified to make the decision about who "deserves" to live, and who doesn't. That was some 70 years ago here in Germany, and it didn't end well for any of the involved groups.
I challenge you to show me a single court, a single judge, who has never made a wrong decision, who has never had one of his sentences reversed or overruled. As long as there can't be 100% certainty, you're willing to kill innocents. You'd rather kill a dozen innocents, then not kill one criminal. And that's complete and utter madness!
If you think the death penalty is okay in the USA (a nation that freely tortures, has government goals influence court decisions, and openly disobeys international conventions), do you also think the death penalty is okay in Russia, China, or North Korea?
...do you think the investment bankers, who brought about the financial crisis with their infinite greed, and ruined countless existences, deserve to live?
...do you think George W. Bush, who plunged the US into several senseless wars based on lies and public deception for economical reasons, deserves to live?
...do you think Keith Alexander, who lied to Congress and led an unprecedented attack on privacy and civil freedom world wide, deserves to live?
Where do you draw the line? It's not okay to kill one other person, but it's okay to send thousands of soldiers to their deaths, even though one knows the war is wrong and the public deceived about the reasons? It's okay to ruin the lives of thousands, out of personal greed and corruption? It's okay to undermine the democratic foundations of several nations by errecting a totalitarian surveillance apparatus that would make the StaSi green with envy?