Bro
I agree upto to the point that Apostacy needs to be accompanied with treason in order for any judgement to be executed and that too by the state authority or whatever body is the legal representative of the system in place. An interesting thing people overlook is that all the hudood prescribed in our religion are related to offenses given against fellow humanity (rape, robbery, killing). Any offense against Allah SWT solely rests within his SWT sole jurisdiction and will be punishable by him SWT only IMHO. A person who Apostates after accepting Islam is for the reason that he never really understood what it was he was testifying to and is not ready yet or he was marginalized unjustly in the muslim society and he returns to his previous one. Once his apostasy takes the face of treason then it is actually intended to harm other humans namely being muslims, this is the point where depending on the circumstances and gravity of threat a more severe punishment which could culminate in capital punishment is an option. The whole argument about taking a murtids life is littered with rational fallacies within the context of the religion or Quran itself, hence IMHO is blown out of proportion by our all too competant scholars.
Now where I disagree is the part about hadith having not come from Prophet Muhammad SAW against the fact that we say He SAW was a blessing for the worlds. I think the context around majority of the hadith is not known or either simply not there and the scholars and people alike have resorted to treating them in a literal context without ifs and buts, and that is where so many fallacy comes in. I am not a hadith-rejector but definitely disagree with how majority of people and scholars choose to interpret them.