The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a sanction that allows the government to deprive a criminal's life. However, whether it is right to give someone the right to kill a person or not has always been controversial throughout human history. Some support the idea of "An eye for an eye," while others think that it is totally wrong to repeat the bloodshed. From my point of view, the death penalty should not be allowed no matter where it is, for not only that one bloodshed would not stop another, but could lead to potential issues like innocent suffering. 
 

     First, more bloodshed does not stop another from happening, the idea of "an eye for an eye" was repulsed in ancient times as can be seen in some literary works. In Aeschylus' trilogy Oresteia, namely the Agamemnon, the Libation Bearers, and The Eumenides, we can see how the effects of "an eye for an eye" turn out wretchedly. As the plot of the trilogy carries out the curse of the house of Atreus, blood crimes are repeating themselves constantly. The queen of Argos, Clytemnestra, intends to murder her husband, the king Agamemnon in their chamber right on his joy back from a triumphal war because he sacrificed their daughter Iphigenia for a god's favor. She then got murdered by her own son who resolves to lay out his justice in revenge for his father. This seemly nonstop tragedy of family murders did not stop until Orestes received a judicial judge and finally ceased the bloodshed, signifying how ancient people viewed the idea of "an eye for an eye" as a brutal act. Through these historical events, we can understand that killing one for another may not be an effective way to solve the problem, for the idea of abolishing the death penalty had already been aroused in ancient times, which is yet controversial nowadays. 
 

     Second, the enforcement of the death penalty can sometimes take innocent people's lives accidentally, for a prisoner might be wrongly convicted. It is proven by history that some death row prisoners turn out to be innocent. For instance, Chiang Kuo-ching, a death row prisoner who was executed on August 13, 1997, after being found guilty of raping and murdering a girl, is then proved to be innocent. There are countless cases like this that happened in Taiwan. Nevertheless, nothing can bring back those who are dead to life. If we replace the death penalty with the penalty of life imprisonment, maybe these kinds of tragedies can be prevented. Even though some say that those who were wronged by the criminals were innocent too, the death penalty still will not bring them back to earth. As an old proverb goes, "only God is qualified enough to judge." To give a mortal the authority to put someone to death is not a wise decision, for mortals make mistakes. Nobody can always make the right decision, so it is better not to give them the right to take human lives. 
 

     Although some claim that the death penalty is effective in crime deterrence, numerous researches show that it is actually a misbelief. In fact, according to a thesis done by Shu-Ching Yang, "Does Death Penalty Have the Deterrent Effect in Taiwan," the crime committing rate has little to do with the carrying out of death penalties. The deed of killing a person itself is an act of crime no matter what it intends to achieve. As the gyre of human history turns, we are now in 21-century which emphasizes the value of human rights. We humans had already gone through timeless slaughtering and unfairness because of wars and other factors, and we gradually understand the importance of peace and life. Nevertheless, the idea of carrying out the death penalty is often aroused. That is to say, some people still want to take people's right to live on earth for they may have committed serious crimes. Yet, it still would not stop crimes from happening. 
 

     To sum up, the death penalty in Taiwan should be stopped, because not only does it would not stop crimes nor will it do literal justice for those innocent people who were wronged by the criminals, but it also could take more innocent people's lives. Moreover, it has nothing to do with crime deterrence, which many people thought it does. With all that mentioned above, the idea of abandoning the death penalty is something Taiwanese people should really take into consideration in this civilized society.