When unfair to the murderer, which also a

When it comes to this second point. There are some objections to inevitably, they would think the murderer and the law is not the same, not the same analogy, and feel the existence of the death penalty can have a deterrent effect on its make it not to hurt people or danger to society. “As Ed and I show in our book, there are good reasons to believe that the death penalty deters murder in contemporary America. One reason is specific evidence of lives saved by an offender’s fear of death. In one case, an armed robber in California told her parole board that the reason she never used a loaded gun in her robberies was “So I would not panic, kill somebody, and get the death penalty.” (Joseph M. Bessette,2018, P10 line1) 4 could suppose this point. However, we have different point about murderer and death penalty or law. “In the USA, as evidence accumulates for racial disparities, miscarriages of justice, and the sentencing of several people who had mental illness, four states have stopped the death penalty since 2008, most recently Maryland in 2013” (The Lancet, 2014, Page 1184) 5. It means that because of human, the murderer was sentenced to death would be affected by emotion, this is unfair to the murderer, which also a human. Law through a series of procedures to determine whether a person should be found guilty, it is logical, also accord with ethics. But the law does not pass then judge whether a person should die, this is obviously not ethical. Everyone is alive, life should not be a lifeless program to judge the life and death. Although the laws are made, according to the will of man but it is only “the majority of people will. “Through the death sentence, it is an indirect in accordance with the “most” intend to “kill” violation of one of their different side. Law is the “most” law, death sentence, just a “majority” into “killer”. Every person shall have the right to life. If not, the killer unwittingly achieves a final and perverse moral victory by making the state a killer too, thus reducing social abhorrence at the conscious extinction of human beings (S v Makwanyane, 357 ZA. (1995)) 6. If we use the law to “kill” someone, it would make the law become “killer”.The third point is that the death penalty is not only violates the moral, humanitarian, and its actual effect is meaningless, are more likely to lead to social retrogression. We could say that the existence of the death penalty will aggravate the violence of the people. When it comes to this point may be someone will protest. According to the view: “We are all in this together. No one in our society escapes the impact of crime and violence which has affected our community in so many ways; crime interferes with our daily life, our personal sense of safety, and our ability to trust. It challenges the fabric of our society, our way of life.” (Elma Whittaker,2013, P3 line1) 7. They do not feel what is executed, cannot to those who want to crime deterrent, which may induce the occurrence of crime, causes society to become dangerous, make the person become violent. But we think it is, as a result of the existence of the death penalty and the execution, make the person’s inner more violence, they will slowly from “justice will prevail” into “force to solve problems”. This is the previous the opposite point of view. This can be seen from some polices have killed people on some tiny clue. “In particular, some military service members experience the violence of wartime as hyper stimulating and exhilarating, and find it difficult to leave this aggressive mindset behind when they return to the civilian world and either begin or resume their careers as law enforcement officers.” (Laurence Miller,2015, P34 line3) 8. Death sentence would be opened to public, people often pay attention to some serious damage to the society. Once you know who did it, they often hope to complete “sanctions” law. But it is not rational, extreme, people just want this person to death, even his family, he shall be sentenced to death, especially the role of public opinion can aggravate anger. So, if not executed, public opinion will be unusually strong, which makes society becomes violent and the law lost its function. The death penalty is the product of the law, not a product of the public opinion. The death penalty is not advanced product behind people’s thought, before it is used to settle and not make the society become violent, the perfection of law makes the death penalty has a better way to replace. We humans are fragile life, in a violent environment will only make us more panic, once a day a person because of theft was sentenced to death, this is not a legal society, but the most primitive, dark forest law of the jungle. At the same time, the death penalty will cost a lot of money.