But the thing is, I definitely wouldn't call him an irredeemable and unforgivable villain, either.
It's the difference between the Punisher and Bullseye. Both are ruthless, both are murderers, and yet I don't find their deeds and souls even remotely comparable.
My big problem with Daniel, the reason he makes me so angry, is that he completely denies the existence of shades of grey. It's all black-and-white to him, all "either you are a sinless hero or you are a complete monster", he refuses to acknowledge anti-heroes and anti-villains.
In UtH, Jason killed deadly criminals, and in particular he targeted those criminals who harmed women and children, shooting and/or beheading them (which, gruesome as it is, is still a quick death); in BftC, Daniel has Jason kill relatively harmless criminals (apparently one of the guys he hung was just a thief), shoot children, and chain random mooks up to make them starve to death slowly.
Do you seriously think that the former and the latter are equally bad? Do you seriously think that UtH!Jason is the same person as BftC!Jason? If so, then we'll just have to agree we completely disagree.