The implementation of death sentences in the present time, especially in Iran, has led to dissatisfaction among some general citizens, jurists, and even some jurists in various ways; because the lack of some of the minimum requirements for implementing the limits, especially death sentences, has led to the denial of legitimacy from implementing such sentences in the present time. The universality of the sentences, the rightfulness of the sentences, the lack of disruption in the coherence of the dimensions of Sharia and the administration of social affairs, and the absence of a religious background in society are among the minimum requirements necessary to lay the groundwork for implementing death sentences in society. The following article, after explaining each of these conditions and pointing out their absence in the current society, explains the jurisprudential solutions to overcome this challenge and prevent the enemy from abusing it. The use of secondary rulings, expedient rulings, and the recognition of the method of punishment are the three main jurisprudential solutions that, by relying on them, can stop the implementation of life-threatening punishments in society. The main achievement of this article is the emphasis on the method of punishment and the possibility of changing it in accordance with the conditions of the society, which, after explaining the first and second solutions, introduces the recognition of the method of punishment as the best and most comprehensive solution to face this problem. The writing method of this article is descriptive-analytical with internal criticism.