I am against using the death penalty as a form of criminal punishment. There are three reasons. First of all, the death penalty is not enough as a deterrent to crime. It is said that the death penalty is a good deterrent, but there is no reliable data that proves that the death penalty decreases the number of dreadful crimes. Also, I think that the deterrent to crime is not only the death penalty but also, for example, life imprisonment. In other words, the death penalty is not a special means to deter crimes, so the death penalty is no excuse for killing a person. In addition, there is a economic problem to continue the death penalty. When the defendant is sentenced to death, it costs enormous amounts of money for retrial and other things, so we can’t save money. Also, in Japan, while prisoners make money by their work at prison, condemned criminals don’t work at detention rooms and they don’t make them. The money that prisoners make become the profit for nation and helps to support victims. So, by abolishing the death penalty, the economic burden for trial becomes lighter and we can support victims and their families by the money that is saved and that prisoners make. I think that it is more important to support victims and their families than execution, so we should save money by abolishing the death penalty. Finally, there is a risk that the judgment is false. For example, in 25 states of America, 124 condemned criminals were released by 2007 because the truth that they are falsely accused became clear before their execution. Like this, there is a possibility that the decision of the death penalty will be reversed. Even if the condemned criminal is actually innocence, the death penalty cannot be redone and it becomes only murder. So, I think that the death penalty should not be executed because of the possibility that the judgment is uncertain. For these reasons, I believe that the death penalty should be abolished.