Capital Punishment: The Only True Justice Essay
1604 Words7 Pages
Justice cannot be served until the debate on capital punishment is resolved and all states have come to agree that the death penalty is the best way to stop crime completely.
"The bottom line is, one method of execution is just as brutal and as barbaric as the next," says Mr. Breedlove of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. This comes straight from the mouth of a member of a national organization against capital punishment. The American Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition defines execution as The act or an instance of putting to death or being put to death as a lawful penalty. So if Breedlove's words hold true, then what he believes is that someone going out and killing someone is barbaric. In…show more content…
How could someone possibly let her off the hook of such a crime. They said it would be just as bad for her to be in that cell alone because of her depression, but does it justify her cutting short the lives of the two children who had no idea of their oncoming death. "All grandeur, all power, all subordination to authority rests on the executioner: he is the horror and the bond of human association. Remove this incomprehensible agent from the world and at that very moment order gives way to chaos, thrones topple and society disappears." Says Joseph de Maistre, a eighteenth century French diplomat. He is right, if we give up our punishing a deadly criminal, then we throw our society into chaos and let the criminals freely do as they please. I would know I was safe if anyone that tried to fatally harm me would be put to death. But in this society when someone can kill someone, get sentenced to life, get paroled and then freed to go about and do the same crime again frankly scares me. Another thing that scares me is the fact that this country has softened up on criminals. It's hard to think that now a days everyone has a right, even though when you go against the law and are put in prison, you are suppose to be stripped of your rights. Not so anymore. Justice in the nineties has slacked up a bit.
"In the late 1950's, on any given day there were about two hundred prisoners awaiting execution," says Hugo Bedau of Tufts University,
Critical Analysis Of Edward Koch's Essay, "Death And Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life"
In Edward I. Koch's essay, "Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life", readers view the opinions Koch has toward the death penalty in today's world. Koch reviews a variety of excuses to abolish the death penalty. He argues the importance of the death penalty, as well as, argues excuses of the death penalty opponents. He argues the ethics and politics towards the importance and support of the death penalty. In the following essay readers will see an evaluation of Koch's essay. The evaluation will: contain a brief overview of Koch's essay, state whether or not Koch's arguments were strong and persuasive, and state whether the essay was successful in what it was trying to say.
The essay, "Death and Justice", contains several of Koch's arguments toward the death penalty. He begins his arguments by analyzing the statement, "The death penalty is 'barbaric'" (Koch, 715). That alone comes off very strong to readers and he continues to use strong words, such as horrify. He then goes on to compare the death penalty to finding a cure for cancer in order to convince readers that the death penalty is needed in order to tolerate injustice, it was very persuasive and passionate. Moving on to his second argument, Koch goes into talking about how the United States is one of few other countries that even has a death penalty. He goes into using statistics in this argument in order to try to prove his point to readers. This argument was not as strong and passionate as the last one and it wasn't very convincing because all it contained were studies and numbers, which can make the reader become less interested in what the author is trying to say. In Koch's third argument he starts off by saying that, "An innocent person might lie executed by mistake"(Koch, 716). This comes off very strong and persuasive, but then Koch goes into talking about how "Human life deserves special protection, and one of the best ways to guarantee that protection is to assure that convicted murderers do not kill again"(Koch, 716), which is the total opposite of what his first sentence stated. This seems to confuse readers and make them unsure of his arguments.
The next argument that Koch has with the death penalty is that he talks about the value of human life. Koch comes off very strong in this argument because of his belief that "by exacting the highest penalty for the taking of human life that we affirm the highest value of human life"(Koch, 717). In Koch's fifth argument readers it seems like it wasn't very necessary to have in the essay because even he says that "This factor no longer seems to be the problem it once was"(Koch, 717). This right away throws readers off because why would it be in the essay if it...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%