Death Penalty- Revenge or Justice?-2

Now the argument forwarded by the death penalty opponents are that it does not bring back the victim and it has been disproportionately applied towards the minorities (especially in America) or a wrong person can be put to death. For the second argument I have already mentioned in my previous post but for the first one is there anything called Justice in all of this. It should not be called revenge but it is Justice that if the victim does not deserve to die in the first place than the person committing the crime should not be given any mercy and must be given death penalty. Whether it is justice (to the victim's families) or Revenge (to some of the opponents) is best left to the hereafter. Other thing is that does not the victim family gets any right in this matter if they want somebody put to death (after the accuser or perpetrator has confessed to the crime) or spare him. It just seems like if you are putting somebody to death there is some sort of closure to victim's families whereas if he is in jail you are still traumatized by him/her being in jail enjoying life (in whatever form). Furthermore what would the opponents do in case of Hitler or the Norwegian massacre guy or the Columbine people or the Madrid bombings or Osama Bin Laden (OBL) what kind of punishment does Amnesty international (AI) or other human right groups recommend in these cases? How would they feel if their loved ones get killed in these massacres, how does the punishment be applied. Does not the punishment fit the crime be applied here and what about the victims, they did not asked to be killed so what is their crime. Why are human rights only for the perpetrators and why not for the victim?