There's a meta discussion about this exact issue you might want to look over. The basic digest seems to be that there isn't. A lot of people would like it, and a lot of people are dead-set against it as counter to the entire purpose of StackExchange. If you really insist, and happen to be a Firefox user, there is a Grease Monkey script for it.
In general I will say that we get at least our share of problem users. There is a process for dealing with them, the front end of which is driven by flags from users (associated downvotes and close votes help to drive home the point as well). If a user is consistently getting a lot of those for a specific type of action, they are supposed to get a warning from the moderators, and if they persist in the same behavior, a short suspension. Subsequent infractions for the same thing result in longer suspensions. We have at least one user who "tested" this process to such an extent that he is now suspended for more than a decade.
However, the root of this process is user flags. That means there may be a lot of time that passes, and a lot of flags raised, before a persistent problem user is supsended for a long period of time. The shorter suspensions before that, you might not even notice. This leads to a lot of user frustration, before the process finally reaches fruition (or the user decides to straighten up and fly right).
I would ask in the meantime, please try not to be vindictive about it. I try to stop to analyze every flag I process, and it takes me much more time to do so if the user is getting flagged capriciously for comments that wouldn't be a problem coming from anybody else. I do get that you are frustrated. Not because I'm some super empathetic person, but because you aren't the only one, and I get to read all the frustrated comments on flags, chat, and meta.
Try to remember this 2nd century quote from Sextus Empericus:
The millstones of the gods grind late, but they grind fine.