Should death penalty be allowed in Taiwan?
 

        Have you ever seen a death penalty incident in your whole life? It is a quarrelsome issue whether we should have a death penalty in law in Taiwan. Whenever there is a murder case, this question will be brought up again. As an old slang goes, “An eye for an eye”, if a person kills someone, he/she should pay it back with his/her life. But some people don’t think so they strongly advise the death penalty should be abolished from the law. However, if do not have a fair judicial system to punish prisoners, how can we get the balance of these criminals who disrespect human life? Apparently, we need death penalty to punish and threat the criminals.

        First, death penalty should be used for retribution as a way to punish the murderer. If one ends the other person’s life, he/she should pay it back with his/her own life. Vengeance is carried out by the state system instead of the private person, and it also give justice to the victim and his family. Of course, punishment and compensation should not be confused, but in practice they are not completely clear-cut. It is the easiest and most effective way. It is more important to protect the rights and interests of innocent people and the safety of society than to forgive those who have committed the worst crimes. By doing so, the society can deliver justice to the victim.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

        Second, a society without the death penalty will only make those criminals more reckless. To the opinion of investigation, death penalty brings fear of death as a tool for plea bargaining.An undeniable fact about human nature is that most people are afraid of death; but on the other hand, there are also a considerable number of felons who have been jailed to death, so it cannot be denied that some people may want to kill and are not afraid of any length of imprison, but giving up killing only because of the possibility of the death penalty. The death penalty has a deterrent effect, and this is supported by quantitative data, and there is a considerable amount of research, including those who advocate for the abolition of the death penalty, supporting that the death penalty can deter potential murders.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

        However, some people may say, “The life of the killer is also a life.” We should protect their rights even they kill a person. They argue that the death penalty violates human rights and human dignity, and the government has no right to deprive anyone’s right to life. Nevertheless, whether one’s life should be protected or not depends on whether he or she is guilty. Abolition of the death penalty is a way to ask everyone to forgive murderers, but forcing forgiveness will only cause secondary harm to the victim. If the murderer kill someone, they should have the preparation of receiving the appropriate punishment. What’s more, some people prefer to abolish the death penalty because of the possibility of wrongful murder, but it cannot be the reason of abolishing death penalty, we can’t stop eating for fear of choking. If the judiciary is rigorous and the procedures are comprehensive, the chances of unjust death are extremely low, including the unjust imprisonment rate of the death penalty. Therefore, the death penalty still has the reason to exist.

In conclusion, death penalty should be allowed in Taiwan. The existence of the death penalty has its important meaning and function. Moreover, if the criminals are sentenced with the death penalty, that means they have all committed heinous crimes. Does the opportunity make sense for them? The answer is apparently “No”. The death penalty should be considered asthe ultimate means of deterring criminal. If the death penalty is abolished, we would lose the most efficient and fairest means of administering justice.

​

​

​

​

​

 

​

 

 

 

Source

https://www.cyc.moj.gov.tw/media/136017/24515105319.pdf

​

​

​