The author recounts overhearing a debate on the death penalty among university students at a restaurant and interjecting with a brutal hypothetical scenario (the brutal murder of their family). By challenging a pro-abolition student (Male A), the author argues that those without the experience of being a victim should not apply 'hypocritical kindness' to the trauma of others, as it may lead to more broken families. The piece concludes with a strong stance that abolitionists are 'fools,' viewing the death penalty as a necessary means of protecting other families and a call for justice rooted in raw empathy for victims.
The article criticizes the tendency of Taiwanese courts to give light sentences and uses the case of an eight-year-old girl having her throat slit to lash out at the position of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP). The author argues that 'bad people are not people' and their treatment should not be compared with that of good people; he also believes the TAEDP is using victims to gain benefits for themselves. The author refutes the 'death penalty is useless' and 'cannot heal the pain' arguments, emphasizing that the death penalty is a system, a 'self-choice' of the criminal, and can bring a minimum degree of psychological compensation to the victim's family. It concludes by describing the TAEDP's philosophy with 'Chunibyo' (8th-grade syndrome), believing it leads to criminals becoming more unscrupulous.