In his article “To Kill or Not to Kill”, Scott Turow tries to convince the audience advocating the capital-punishment system in Illinois to inspect its fairness and efficacy. He tackles this issue because he provides that the system is defective. Even though he goes back and forth from favoring the capital punishment issue to rejecting it, he clearly states his penalty opposition, supporting it with powerful examples, factual data, and a metaphor. To appear moral, credible, and knowledgeable, the author uses his scholarly tone, demonstrating his respectable position. He, as a lawyer and “one… members of a commission appointed by Governor”, had to present his position on the law during the reforms of the capital punishment system in Illinois. Building his ethos, he says: …show more content…
For example, Turow illustrates that even people, who show anger towards the hideous crimes, still criticize the punishment, questioning the government capacity to distinguish between the innocent and the guilty. Furthermore, “in the last decade the murder rate in states without the death penalty has remained consistently lower than in the states that have had executions.” (Turow 2003) He includes that to show that the system is faulty and not essential because it doesn’t discourage criminals. Also, he points to the fact that Illinois, which has a capital penalty, has a higher death rate than Michigan, which doesn’t apply the penalty law, even though both of them have similar racial makeup, income levels, and population arrangement between cities and rural areas. Moreover, he argues against the belief that “death penalty saves money, because it avoids the expense of lifetime incarceration”, (Turow 2003) He notes the high costs of capital litigation. So, Turow uses factual data and informed opinions as convincing logical appeals because they coax people into thinking that they don’t need the
The death penalty has been one of the most controversial debates in the United States. Some believe that an eye for an eye is an effective mean of punishment while others believe that such mean of punishment is not effective in modern society. Edward Koch believes the death penalty affirms the sanctity of life. In the article by Edward Koch, published in The New Republic, “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life,’ he utilizes the rhetorical devices of ethos, pathos and logos to justify his position for the death penalty towards the people opposing the death penalty.
The death penalty has been a controversial topic of debate for years, specifically whether the punishment is ethical and effective. Many have even argued that the criminal justice system has imposed flawed and misguided standards and practices which have caused choatic conditions to seep into American life. Truman Capote’s novel “In Cold Blood” examines the nature of this system by recounting the trail of Dick Hickock and Perry Smith, who had been accused of murdering the Clutter family in rural Kansas. Through Capotes vehement opinions about numerous aspects of the process, the narrative includes a stong implicit answer to the central question of whether society actually achieves justice when it imposes the death penalty. Throughout “In Cold
In “Kill Capital Punishment” by Janine Espino a Reagan High school student argues that Capital Punishment should be abolished in all fifty states, Espino’s position is vaild. The author claims that killing another human cannot be taken back, one you murder a living individual you cannot take it back. The author argues that since manslaughter another individual in a malicious fashion is illegal so should capital punishment. Espino gives a quote by Peggy Parks in that was published in the article “Current Issues: The Death Penalty” published on 29 March.
Oshinsky did a remarkable job explaining the history of the death penalty in a clear and concise way. While the text was fairly short, he effectively provided his readers with well documented and relevant information on how controversial the death penalty has been throughout the past few centuries. He undertook an exceptionally important issue that many Americans do not know much about, or may have conflicting feelings
In writing the essay entitled "More Innocents Die When We Don't Have Capital Punishment," Dennis Prager examines the arguments of those against capital punishment. He makes a deductive argument that supports his conclusion in favor of capital punishment, taking the stance that murderers should undergo execution as capital punishment imposes a lessened threat to innocent lives than if it was not an option. Furthermore, Prager makes several claims throughout his writing regarding those opposing capital punishment, their arguments, and the effects on the lives of innocent people. Additionally, through this essay, he commits a few logical fallacies such as false dilemma, strawman, slippery slope, and appealing to the person. Prager's essay presents
“In countries with a properly functioning legal system, the mob continues to exist, but it is rarely called upon to mete out capital punishment. The right to take human life belongs to the state. Not so in societies where weak courts and poor law enforcement are combined with intractable structural injustices. “In our present day society we as Americans have the cognitive dissonance that what the courts say are final, but also hold to the fact that the majority’s opinion rules.
This paper will serve to show that capital punishment is not, in fact, ethically permissible. I will argue this by explaining the government’s duty to its people, and how capital punishment is indeed a violation of these prima facie duties. 1. The government has a duty to protect its people from harm (including murder, abuse of power, etc.). 2.
Crime was so high and the crimes being done were so dangerous that in 1936 little less than 200 people were executed through the death penalty (“Historical Data.” Crime and Justice Atlas). These studies shocked the many that such a
Over the past last two decades the support of the death penalty has been declining dramatically in America. In the op-ed article “Most Americans Support the death penalty” published in the Washington Post News on the 17th of April, reporter Mark Berman composes an overview on the feelings most Americans have towards the death penalty. This was accomplished through the division of various sizeable groups between gender, race, and political views. On this specific subject the reporter of this article, Mark Berman, demands that “there is still some risk that an innocent person will be put to death” (Berman, p. 1). Throughout Berman’s op-ed article he portrays his demand through two out of the three appeals, pathos, logos as well as the feedback
The University of Texas-Pan American Essay #2 Anna Salkinder LSPI July 27, 2015 The death penalty has been a major topic of debate in the United States as well as various parts of the world for numerous years. At this time, there are thirty-one states in which the death penalty is legal. Nineteen states have completely abolished it (“States with and without The Death Penalty”). Since its initial development back in the 1600’s, the death penalty has taken a different course in the way it is utilized. In its early days, the death penalty was greatly used and implemented for several offenses.
Ever since the outset of the American Constitution, capital punishment has existed as a crime sentence in the United States. However, in recent decades, this topic has become highly controversial, as many states have dictated against the death penalty. Although states with this position on capital punishment are increasing, some states, such as Texas, have continued to edict this practice in their provinces. In the State of Texas, the sentence to death upon a person should not be permitted due to the fact it can wrongly convict a person, its court trial is highly expensive, and it brings forth an unjust treatment.
Ethos is credibility appeal in rhetoric, it's the the appeal of ethics and it convinces the audience that the speaker is reliable. An example of this in Serial is when Sarah, hires detective Jim Trainum, to help look into Adnan’s case. Sarah says “But clearly the jury found Jay believable, or believable enough. After a six week trial, they convicted Adnan in just two hours. We
In the the Supreme Court case Gregg Vs. Georgia, Justice Stewart concluded that “We now hold that the punishment of death does not invariably violate the Constitution.” (GREGG v. GEORGIA, 1976), answering the question of whether or not capital punishment is ever unconstitutional. Some may argue that Stewart is saying that the death penalty is sometimes considered constitutional, however, it is important to note that if we as Americans don’t enforce the constitutional rights of human beings at all times, the foundation of our nation will slowly begin to lose its strength. If in any way something can be declared as unconstitutional, then from there on out it will never fall into the realm of being constitutional.
The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.
Annotated Bibliography Draft Student name : Haider Zafaryab Student number: 2360526 Thesis Statement : Capital Punishment is a very controversial topic around the globe. I believe that it does more harm than good and breeds violence in society. Source 1: Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996).