With the implementation of the rule of law society and the development of humanism, death penalty is the deliberate taking of human life as state-sanctioned punishment. In recent years, a majority of the world’s countries have further restricted or abolished executions all together. But now there are a lot of voice to abolish the death penalty still one thing this question, some people will think and its important role is not to abolish death penalty. So, this article will not respect from death to life, its impact on heart and impede social progress these three simple views on the cause of the death penalty must be abolished. In order to find evidence to support the view, I decided to find the relevant papers on the Internet and consulting some similar views. After two weeks, I through a large number of data access and consulting, finally found strong evidence to support my point of view. So, I finally come to the conclusion that the death penalty must be abolished.With the development of science and technology and human progress, handling of the case law is becoming more and more human. Whether to abolish the death penalty is a long existing problem, and the two sides have opinions to this. In my opinion, with the evolution of human thought and humanitarian spirit, the death penalty is violating the respect for life, it exists in today’s society is not reasonable. Therefore, in my opinion, the abolition of the death penalty is very important and urgent. I will analyze why abolish the death penalty from the following aspects.There has three main idea that we need no abolish the dead penalty, the first main idea is that the death penalty on humanitarian is unreasonable, it is not respect of the value of life, life is also the embodiment of the inequality. Humanitarian is people-oriented to respect a person; this person values a hundredfold. With its indictment judge a man to death, the existence of the death penalty is equivalent to ignore the value of the person indirectly. One may think that death itself it is committed to people don’t respect, he already is in violation of the principle of humanism, as a murderer, he is ignored and deprived of the value of human life. As the prosecuting attorney said: “It cheapens the life of an innocent murder victim to say that society has no right to keep the murderer from ever killing again. In my view, society has not only the right, but the duty to act in self-defense to protect the innocent.” (Steve Stewart ,2008, P1 line4) 1. It reminds us that the criminal must be sent to death. But we have to know, “death penalty” is not “condemned”. Although the latter may be in violation of the principle of humanism, but when we enforce the law, should not like him for the victims don’t respect the value of people, but should start from humanitarian. We should be link and law, even if is not repay injury with kindness, should also be “beat swords into ploughshares”, is not appear more life went on, but to give life a chance. Give life a chance also makes some mistake could become right. “The concern about mistakes in capital cases is the most powerful driving force towards a re-evaluation of the death penalty in the U.S. today.” (Richard C. Dieter, n.d, p.19 line6) 2 Death sentence, just by someone current to judge whether this person should be dead, but most of the time, this is equivalent to ignore the value of he/she once created, even wipe out the possibility of the future value. For example, Tom is a drug dealer, according to Chinese law, he would have been sentenced to death, because the law not to care about whether he has done valuable things, just only according to his drug behavior to sentence him to be executed. Tom, however, by drug trafficking to addict to earn money to establish a charity organization and let more people from hunger, fear not died from disease. From the perspective of outsiders, drug trafficking, Tom is guilty, but from his motivation, he is just using the wrong way to achieve the purpose of correctly. “Death penalty” is a machine, just a program, the lack of motive and effect analysis, which ignored the people create the value of the future, but also the value of the “death”. Judging if only depending on the result, then we would lack what we as a people should have emotions, we should not leave things to a program to perform. We are human, not step-by-step machine, in accordance with the law and at the same time we also should be more with people thinking, if only the machine, what a terrible thing! From the sentence that: “It is also an inhuman punishment for it “…involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person’s humanity”, and it is degrading because it strips the convicted person of all dignity and treats him or her as an object to be eliminated by the state.” (Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238. (1972)) 3, it effective to prove this point. Each person’s life only has once, no matter what the man had done, we should all remember that still is a person, not a fierce animal. The death penalty, it is value of negative to people. And abolish the death penalty, it is respect for the human life.The murderer is alive, so his execution is also equivalent to make law become “killer”.