Although the problem of keeping or abolishing death penalty has not reached an agreement in the long debate, the argument put by the two sides enables us to stand on the forefathers’ shoulder to view this problem: should death penalty be abolished? Different people have different opinions. I think it should not be abolished. The followings are my reasons:
Firstly, death penalty is the necessary way to punish some special crimes. As our society is very complicated, it is easy to appear some series crimes. Those crimes are not forgiven. In order to keep the society stable, the government should publish those people by death penalty. Otherwise, the society will not be safe.
Secondly, when a person kills people, he does not receive death penalty, but other punishment, like life imprisonment. Does anybody think that life imprisonment is a waste of resource, and once the prisoner runs away from the prison, it is dangerous to the society? While death penalty won’t make that happen. Therefore, death penalty cannot be replaced by other punishment.
Recently, Norway suffered a huge explosion and a shooting, which declaring the abolition of capital punishment is unwise. Nearly a hundred people died in the two events that were and made by the same boy. However, as the law is too permissive, the boy was sentenced to imprisonment for 14 years and he could be released on parole. Norwegians worry about that the people who cause great harm cannot be executed. After 14 years, he can walk in the street again, which it is very frightened. According to the survey, 80% of Norwegians want the boy to be sentenced to death, but the Norwegian law doesn't have the death penalty. The example can be quite clear that death penalty should exist.
In short, the death penalty helps society become stable. China's securities need the death penalty. So, I think it should not be abolished.