51250 Why death penalty is moralProponents of death penalty argue that aspiring criminals are likely to refrain from murder if the system makes it undoubtedly clear, through constant executions, that the same fate will befall them if they continued their criminal behavior of murder (Moore, 2014). The fact that murder is planned justifies death penalty. However, owing to the fact that there are other equally pertinent triggers of murder, capital punishment may arguably reduce cases of murder but only among those who are reasonable in the run-up to the commission of the crime. Regardless, while capital punishment prevents cases of murder among a majority of criminals, especially those who fear for their lives, the remaining cases of murders are arguably attributed to other stimuli such as substance influence, extreme anger, betrayal and or vengeance. Hinman (2012) noted that with capital punishment being made real for murderers, many criminals will likely participate in lesser crimes as a way of self-preservation. As such, capital punishment serves as the ultimate cautionary against all felonies including theft. The argument is especially credible because a criminal who is fully aware that the criminal justice system will hand him or her death penalty will seek more favorable penalties by refraining from murder. It is rational, therefore, to argue that the average criminal may refrain from robbery even if they did not have the intention of murdering the property owner or possessor.