Friday, March 5, 2010
1.3 Reflection
For my writing, I feel after I got the hang of what the rebuttal was suppose to look like, I enjoyed writing it. I remember I was at my friend’s house and I was looking and adding sources into my paper. I felt writing the paper was actually pretty fun. To incorporate sources and to strengthen your reasons for an argument with information you had to dig up made the whole process a lot more enjoyable than I last remember doing in high school. The shift from rebuttal to rogerian seems to be a hard shift just because I can’t remember seeing anything close to what the idea of a rogerian argument is suppose to look like. I feel a rogerian argument is supposed to be just agreement and once in a while you are just going to throw a suggestion at the reader. The idea of a rogerian argument seems to be similar to if a girlfriend wanted something and the boy friend was stubborn. The girl would have to try to make her boyfriend happier and in result get what she wanted. My overall views of the class are pretty good. I have no major complaints; and I feel that the way this class was design was made to incorporate students to speak out.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
1.3 For The Death Penalty
Dear North Carolina Observer,
In your article “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process”, your author is encouraging the North Carolina natives to speak out on removing the death penalty from their state. Within this editorial, the author agrees with Adam Liptak’s, New York Times writer, view of Capital Punishment being flawed in the United States Justice System. Adam Stated in the original editorial, “The system doesn't work because it cannot be reconciled with competing goals - the ability of juries to make independent decisions about who is sentenced to death, and fairness in a system that executes some and spares others who have committed similar crimes.” Liptak is trying to explain his reasoning of why Capital Punishment should be removed from the United State’s Justice System. He believes Capital Punishment will not take into account how the juries’ feelings will affect the outcome of the final decision and that Capital punishment does not treat the same crimes equally; in the sense that not all crimes will produce the same punishment.
I disagree with the argument of your editorial. I feel the death penalty system should continue to be used in the state of North Carolina. Over two-third of the states in the U.S. have a death penalty implemented (“Murder Rates”). On a bigger scale, many countries including China and Egypt also allow for the death penalty (“Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries”). Capital punishment can be successful when the people executing it follow the proper procedures to ensure everything was done legally and correctly. States that allow Capital Punishment should expect to see a lower crime and murder rate. Also, allowing for the death penalty could save state funding from creating jail facilities and crime management.
Maintaining a death penalty in North Carolina poses a threat to criminals. In 2008, North Carolina has the 11th highest murder rate in the nation. North Carolina’s murder rate in 2008 was 6.5 people out of every 100,000 people (“Murder Rates”). Criminals who know that they could potentially receive the death penalty for committing a serious crime would more likely resist from committing that crime with the fear of death as a consequence. With the existence of this doubt, crime rates should be much lower in states that use the death penalty. An editorial from the Washington Post titled, “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason for decreasing crime rates in 2009 from 2008 was due to more severe consequences. (“Why are violent crime rates falling” par 7). The article is explaining that the reduction in the crime rates was due to criminals realizing the serious punishments that came from their crimes. By continuing to use the death penalty, crime rates should slowly decrease over the next couple of years.
One reason your editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from your article
“Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.”
This quote is merely stating all how much money was dedicated to the Death Penalty in North Carolina in the years of 2005 to 2006. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone, the reader could assume that it would have gone to projects to improve the society. However, the problem of dealing with criminals still exists. Criminals would be more likely to commit crimes knowing that eventually they would be able to get back out and do it again without a strict punishment.
This would lead to all of these criminals, new and old, being placed into jails until their court trial date and most likely be placed back into jail for a certain amount of years. The talk show News Talks Radio WHIO, Tom Michaels states that the cost of running a jail in Clark County, Ohio was estimated to be around $6 million a year. The recession, payment of workers, and other factors was the reason for these high prices (Michaels 1). If the death penalty was discontinued, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of its criminals. The funding for the production of most, if not all, of these jails would come from tax payers. It is not reasonable for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state because it has experienced higher crime rates and were for it. It would require the state to create more jails to house more criminals resulting in a lot of money being used.
The other situation that could occur because of the rise in the crime rate would be the need to increase authorities and police forces to handle the increased crime. After authorities capture
criminals and place them into jail, the cost of caring for the criminal would be $55 a day and could result in a total cost of $20,108 a year. (“Cost of Imprisonment” 1). This would only be the cost for one criminal. Costs for all the potential criminals could be off the charts. Creating more jails and using more money to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money being spent. This doesn’t include the cost for jury and trial for all the criminals. Both of these issues could come from removing the death penalty costing the state much more than it would cost to keep the death penalty.
Another reason the author recommends that North Carolina abandon Capital Punishment is because he feels that it is inconsistent. The editorial questions the death penalty’s fairness and partially questions the juries’ ability to “make independent decisions about who is sentenced.” I have not been in a situation where I had to decide whether a person will live or die however, I can imagine it is very difficult to give a person the death penalty. But, in today’s society, programs and certain rules have been made to make the decision making more livable. These rules are suppose to ensure that each person receives a fair and ethical trial. For instance, when dealing with criminals who have certain mental disabilities, the American Bar Association recommends
“Defendants should not be executed of sentenced to death if, at the time of the offense, they had significant limitations in both their intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior… resulting from mental retardation, dementia, or a traumatic brain injury.”
(“Recommendation and Report” 2)
The American Bar Association, an association based off determining if certain legal conduct is considered ethical in the United States, makes a claim that certain people who exhibit mental problems should not be given the death penalty. Also, most evidence in today’s society is mainly from DNA evidence that is all based off science and new technologies that are created for these certain situations. It is hard to doubt evidence that was handled with care that proves a criminal to be guilty. To say that people are not given fair treatment and are not trialed equally is inaccurate because of the many restrictions and rules in place in order to protect the criminal and provide a fair trial.
From the North Carolina Observer, the editorial “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process” was published. It was an article that stated the death penalty system was flawed and was not needed. I feel that keeping the death penalty in North Carolina will be more beneficial overall. The results of keeping the death penalty in the state could be reduction of crime and more money for projects/issues that the state could address. The idea of the death penalty will always be a controversial topic that many people will argue, but I feel that keeping the death penalty in North Carolina would be the best action the North Carolina natives can take.
Sincerely
Bryan Vu
Citations
“Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries.” Death Penalty Information Center. 29 January 2009. Amnesty International. Web. 1 March 2010
“Cost of Imprisonment.” Florida Department of Corrections. June 2009. Department of Corrections. Web. 1 March 2010
Michaels, Tom. “Cost of running Clark County Jail tops 6 million in 2009”. WHIO Local News. 22 February 2010. News Talk Radio WHIO. Web. 1 March 2010
“Murder Rates 1996- 2008.” Death Penalty Information Center. September 2009. FBI Uniform Crime Unit. Web. 1 March 2010
“Recommendation and Report on the Death Penalty and Persons with Mental Disabilities” Death Penalty Information Center. 8 August 2006. American Bar Association. Web. 1 March 2010.
“Why are violent crime rates falling?” The Washington Post. 2 January 2010. Washington Post. Web. 1 March 2010
In your article “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process”, your author is encouraging the North Carolina natives to speak out on removing the death penalty from their state. Within this editorial, the author agrees with Adam Liptak’s, New York Times writer, view of Capital Punishment being flawed in the United States Justice System. Adam Stated in the original editorial, “The system doesn't work because it cannot be reconciled with competing goals - the ability of juries to make independent decisions about who is sentenced to death, and fairness in a system that executes some and spares others who have committed similar crimes.” Liptak is trying to explain his reasoning of why Capital Punishment should be removed from the United State’s Justice System. He believes Capital Punishment will not take into account how the juries’ feelings will affect the outcome of the final decision and that Capital punishment does not treat the same crimes equally; in the sense that not all crimes will produce the same punishment.
I disagree with the argument of your editorial. I feel the death penalty system should continue to be used in the state of North Carolina. Over two-third of the states in the U.S. have a death penalty implemented (“Murder Rates”). On a bigger scale, many countries including China and Egypt also allow for the death penalty (“Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries”). Capital punishment can be successful when the people executing it follow the proper procedures to ensure everything was done legally and correctly. States that allow Capital Punishment should expect to see a lower crime and murder rate. Also, allowing for the death penalty could save state funding from creating jail facilities and crime management.
Maintaining a death penalty in North Carolina poses a threat to criminals. In 2008, North Carolina has the 11th highest murder rate in the nation. North Carolina’s murder rate in 2008 was 6.5 people out of every 100,000 people (“Murder Rates”). Criminals who know that they could potentially receive the death penalty for committing a serious crime would more likely resist from committing that crime with the fear of death as a consequence. With the existence of this doubt, crime rates should be much lower in states that use the death penalty. An editorial from the Washington Post titled, “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason for decreasing crime rates in 2009 from 2008 was due to more severe consequences. (“Why are violent crime rates falling” par 7). The article is explaining that the reduction in the crime rates was due to criminals realizing the serious punishments that came from their crimes. By continuing to use the death penalty, crime rates should slowly decrease over the next couple of years.
One reason your editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from your article
“Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.”
This quote is merely stating all how much money was dedicated to the Death Penalty in North Carolina in the years of 2005 to 2006. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone, the reader could assume that it would have gone to projects to improve the society. However, the problem of dealing with criminals still exists. Criminals would be more likely to commit crimes knowing that eventually they would be able to get back out and do it again without a strict punishment.
This would lead to all of these criminals, new and old, being placed into jails until their court trial date and most likely be placed back into jail for a certain amount of years. The talk show News Talks Radio WHIO, Tom Michaels states that the cost of running a jail in Clark County, Ohio was estimated to be around $6 million a year. The recession, payment of workers, and other factors was the reason for these high prices (Michaels 1). If the death penalty was discontinued, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of its criminals. The funding for the production of most, if not all, of these jails would come from tax payers. It is not reasonable for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state because it has experienced higher crime rates and were for it. It would require the state to create more jails to house more criminals resulting in a lot of money being used.
The other situation that could occur because of the rise in the crime rate would be the need to increase authorities and police forces to handle the increased crime. After authorities capture
criminals and place them into jail, the cost of caring for the criminal would be $55 a day and could result in a total cost of $20,108 a year. (“Cost of Imprisonment” 1). This would only be the cost for one criminal. Costs for all the potential criminals could be off the charts. Creating more jails and using more money to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money being spent. This doesn’t include the cost for jury and trial for all the criminals. Both of these issues could come from removing the death penalty costing the state much more than it would cost to keep the death penalty.
Another reason the author recommends that North Carolina abandon Capital Punishment is because he feels that it is inconsistent. The editorial questions the death penalty’s fairness and partially questions the juries’ ability to “make independent decisions about who is sentenced.” I have not been in a situation where I had to decide whether a person will live or die however, I can imagine it is very difficult to give a person the death penalty. But, in today’s society, programs and certain rules have been made to make the decision making more livable. These rules are suppose to ensure that each person receives a fair and ethical trial. For instance, when dealing with criminals who have certain mental disabilities, the American Bar Association recommends
“Defendants should not be executed of sentenced to death if, at the time of the offense, they had significant limitations in both their intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior… resulting from mental retardation, dementia, or a traumatic brain injury.”
(“Recommendation and Report” 2)
The American Bar Association, an association based off determining if certain legal conduct is considered ethical in the United States, makes a claim that certain people who exhibit mental problems should not be given the death penalty. Also, most evidence in today’s society is mainly from DNA evidence that is all based off science and new technologies that are created for these certain situations. It is hard to doubt evidence that was handled with care that proves a criminal to be guilty. To say that people are not given fair treatment and are not trialed equally is inaccurate because of the many restrictions and rules in place in order to protect the criminal and provide a fair trial.
From the North Carolina Observer, the editorial “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process” was published. It was an article that stated the death penalty system was flawed and was not needed. I feel that keeping the death penalty in North Carolina will be more beneficial overall. The results of keeping the death penalty in the state could be reduction of crime and more money for projects/issues that the state could address. The idea of the death penalty will always be a controversial topic that many people will argue, but I feel that keeping the death penalty in North Carolina would be the best action the North Carolina natives can take.
Sincerely
Bryan Vu
Citations
“Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries.” Death Penalty Information Center. 29 January 2009. Amnesty International. Web. 1 March 2010
“Cost of Imprisonment.” Florida Department of Corrections. June 2009. Department of Corrections. Web. 1 March 2010
Michaels, Tom. “Cost of running Clark County Jail tops 6 million in 2009”. WHIO Local News. 22 February 2010. News Talk Radio WHIO. Web. 1 March 2010
“Murder Rates 1996- 2008.” Death Penalty Information Center. September 2009. FBI Uniform Crime Unit. Web. 1 March 2010
“Recommendation and Report on the Death Penalty and Persons with Mental Disabilities” Death Penalty Information Center. 8 August 2006. American Bar Association. Web. 1 March 2010.
“Why are violent crime rates falling?” The Washington Post. 2 January 2010. Washington Post. Web. 1 March 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Intro exercise in class
“There are about 40 million Americans who smoke cigarettes” (par. 4). Fact paraphrase
While one out of five people in our country is a smoker (par.4), the wildest successful vilification” of them is hardly provable (par. 5). You claim that the government is “almost finished with smokers; but never in history has a tyrant arisen one day and then decided to tyrannize no more”. (par. 7) But the real tyrant here is the tobacco companies themselves
“As a result of both official and non-official fraudulent claims about the health effects, as well as the health-care costs of smoking, there has been widely successful vilification of cigarette smokers and tobacco manufacturers” (par. 5). Point of view
“These people who control our lives are almost finished with smokers; but never in history has a tyrant arisen one day and then decided to tyrannize no more” (par. 7).
Walter E. Williams’ essay “Nazi Tactics,” which claims that lawmakers who are outlawing secondhand smoke are discriminating against smokers in the same way the Nazis discriminated against Jews.
Where Freeman
Date august 2002
Dear Mr. Williams
In your essay “Nazi Tactics”, that was posted in the George Mason Freeman on August 2002, you tried to establish a relation between Anti Smokers and the Nazi empire in Germany. You stated that “As a result of both official and non-official fraudulent claims about the health effects, as well as the health-care costs of smoking, there has been widely successful vilification of cigarette smokers and tobacco manufacturers” (par. 5). People are trying to make it seem as smokers and tobacco manufacturers are the main villain or bad guy behind this world, but really the anti smokers are the ones that are removing the rights of the smokers in your point of view. Every person has a right that they can do what they want in the constrictions of the bill of rights, and smoking is allowed under these constrictions.
While one out of five people in our country is a smoker (par.4), the wildest successful vilification” of them is hardly provable (par. 5). You claim that the government is “almost finished with smokers; but never in history has a tyrant arisen one day and then decided to tyrannize no more”. (par. 7) But the real tyrant here is the tobacco companies themselves
“As a result of both official and non-official fraudulent claims about the health effects, as well as the health-care costs of smoking, there has been widely successful vilification of cigarette smokers and tobacco manufacturers” (par. 5). Point of view
“These people who control our lives are almost finished with smokers; but never in history has a tyrant arisen one day and then decided to tyrannize no more” (par. 7).
Walter E. Williams’ essay “Nazi Tactics,” which claims that lawmakers who are outlawing secondhand smoke are discriminating against smokers in the same way the Nazis discriminated against Jews.
Where Freeman
Date august 2002
Dear Mr. Williams
In your essay “Nazi Tactics”, that was posted in the George Mason Freeman on August 2002, you tried to establish a relation between Anti Smokers and the Nazi empire in Germany. You stated that “As a result of both official and non-official fraudulent claims about the health effects, as well as the health-care costs of smoking, there has been widely successful vilification of cigarette smokers and tobacco manufacturers” (par. 5). People are trying to make it seem as smokers and tobacco manufacturers are the main villain or bad guy behind this world, but really the anti smokers are the ones that are removing the rights of the smokers in your point of view. Every person has a right that they can do what they want in the constrictions of the bill of rights, and smoking is allowed under these constrictions.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Reflection 1.2
For my second draft, I felt that it was a little hard to change my essay. Finding some of the small errors were most easy, but deciding what parts would be good to change was my main concern. Some of the areas where I did make global changes were in the parts were I felt I was writing the way I would be speaking. The informal style. To address some of the feedback from my group mates and from myself, I felt the hardest thing to do was to add sources and to make my whole paper organized. I first looked through the JMU data base to find some information, but I still have no found my jackpot source. That made me have to look harder and find some sources that skim the edge of my topic, but not totally relate to it, which I think makes my paper a little weak. Also, I’ve been having problems with finding sources with all the credentials. I have some articles from well known news papers, like the Washington post, that just have authors, which is annoying.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Second Draft
In the article “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process”, the author is encouraging the North Carolina natives to speak out on removing the death penalty from the state. Within this editorial, the author takes Adam Liptak’s, of the New York Times, views of the reason why the Capital Punishment is flawed in the United States. Adam Stated “The system doesn't work because it cannot be reconciled with competing goals - the ability of juries to make independent decisions about who is sentenced to death, and fairness in a system that executes some and spares others who have committed similar crimes”. The idea that Adam is trying to propose is that the reasons why Capital Punishment should be removed from the United State’s Justice system is because he feels Capital Punishment will not take into account how the juries’ feelings will affect the outcome of the final decision and that Capital punishment does not treat the same crimes fairly; in the sense that not all crimes will produce the same punishment.
I feel the exact opposite of what this editorial is trying to propose. I feel that Capital Punishment should be allowed in the United States. In a perfect world were greed and poverty aren’t major problems in our society, Capital Punishment would not be necessary and could be abandoned. But since we don’t live in a perfect world, I feel Capital punishment should still be kept in our justice system. Capital punishment can be successful when the people who are in control of Capital punishment take proper steps and ensure that everything was done correctly to properly give someone the verdict of the death penalty as a punishment. But the negatives surrounding the process of Capital Punishment are usually the ones that are well known, thus giving Capital punishment a negative conation that the government is just killing many criminals.
Capital punishment can be used as a threat to criminals. A criminal knowing that he/she could receive the death penalty after commit a crime could add a little risk into the head of the criminal, thus creating doubt and possibly preventing the crime of happening in the first place. This being a possibility, crime rates could fall in the states that still allow for the use of the death penalty. An editorial from the Washington Post titled “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason why crime rates are falling from the 2008 year to the 2009 year is because harsher sentencing to criminals have take many criminals off the streets(AUTHOR NEEDED). Also, the idea of harsher sentencing relates to the use of the Death Penalty on certain crimes. Keeping the Capital Punishment as an option for certain crimes could produce lower crime rates each year due to the fact criminals could realize that a crime committed could cost them their own life through the justice system, thus adding fear into the mind of the criminals.
One reason this editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from the editorial
“Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.”
This quote is merely stating all of this money that was used or went to the use of the Death Penalty in North Carolina in the years of 2005 to 2006. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone to, we could assume that it would have gone to something that would have improved the society for the North Carolina natives. The problem which still would have existed is what would happen to all of the criminals that could have received the death penalty. Or even, what happens to all the crimes that could now occur in the state of North Carolina due to the fact that criminals now know that they cannot be given death for any crime, thus removing any real risk of a punishment from the state to the criminal.
What would happen in this case is that all of these criminals(new and old) would be placed into jail until their court date where they would be trialed and most likely be placed back into jail for a x amount of years. In this response, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of these new criminals. The funding for the production of most, if not all, of these jails would come from tax payers. That would only seem reasonable because if they didn’t, where would there criminals go? To South Carolina? Neighboring States? It would not seem logical for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state, due to the fact that crime rates have risen and they are unprepared for rise of criminals.
The other situation that could occur due to a rise of crime rates would be that the state would need to increase their authority and police forces to crack down on the increase crimes rates. Both creating more jails for an increase in criminals and giving more money for authorizes to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money being spent. This doesn’t include the jury and trial cost for all the new criminals. This being one possibility to the outcome of abandoning the Death penalty, it would result in a North Carolina paying for the creation of more jails, the installment of more authorizes, a society that would have to live with a high risk of crime in their neighborhood, and millions of dollars being dedicated to crime; all if North Carolina were to abandon the Death Penalty.
When a person is given the death penalty, it requires a lot of evidence to give a criminal the death penalty. Quoted from the web article Innocence and Death Penalty: The increasing danger of Executing the innocence”, Richard Dieter states “The danger that innocent people will be executed because of errors in the criminal justice system is getting worse. A total of 69 people have been released from death row since 1973 after evidence of their innocence emerged”. Richard, being the executive director the Death penalty information center, is stating that the possibility for recovering evidence to over turn the death penalty is possible, but rare. We hear the stories where some evidence was found at the last moment that released the criminal of the death penalty charge. This rarely happens and when it does happen, it sometimes can be evidence that could be controversial and can be questionable, but still allowed. Mistakes can happen throughout the long process. The end result of this process can mean the life of a human being, but we are all human beings and mistakes can be made. To say that since the Death Penalty process made a few mistakes throughout its long history of being used in the United States and that it should be abandoned because of these mistakes seems unfair.
The Capital punishment system was created for the people to ensure that every person who has a chance to receive the death penalty has a fair trial. The jury would hopefully be chosen to be unbiased towards race, economic status, etc. and each jury member would hopefully have the ability to understand the evidence to decide the verdict relating to the criminal. The evidence provided is assumed to be correct and complete. And if any of these credentials were not met or was flawed, the chance of someone receiving the death penalty would almost be zero. The problems that occur throughout the death penalty system are not caused by the system itself, but rather the people that are involved with it.
The reasons why this editorial stated to abandon the death penalty for the State of North Carolina would cause more harm than good for the natives of the state. The article addresses the idea of innocence people being convicted; bias juries or judges being a factor in the final verdict, and the total cost of having the death penalty as an option being the reasons why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment. But the author does overlook the fact that if he were to ban the death penalty, the state could end up to be a place where no one would want to live due to the rise in crime rates and no money going to improve the public through schools, parks, etc. The idea of banning the Death penalty will be a conversional subject that will always be argued against, but in my opinion, keeping the death penalty as an option will produce a safer and more economical society for the North Carolina natives to live in.
I feel the exact opposite of what this editorial is trying to propose. I feel that Capital Punishment should be allowed in the United States. In a perfect world were greed and poverty aren’t major problems in our society, Capital Punishment would not be necessary and could be abandoned. But since we don’t live in a perfect world, I feel Capital punishment should still be kept in our justice system. Capital punishment can be successful when the people who are in control of Capital punishment take proper steps and ensure that everything was done correctly to properly give someone the verdict of the death penalty as a punishment. But the negatives surrounding the process of Capital Punishment are usually the ones that are well known, thus giving Capital punishment a negative conation that the government is just killing many criminals.
Capital punishment can be used as a threat to criminals. A criminal knowing that he/she could receive the death penalty after commit a crime could add a little risk into the head of the criminal, thus creating doubt and possibly preventing the crime of happening in the first place. This being a possibility, crime rates could fall in the states that still allow for the use of the death penalty. An editorial from the Washington Post titled “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason why crime rates are falling from the 2008 year to the 2009 year is because harsher sentencing to criminals have take many criminals off the streets(AUTHOR NEEDED). Also, the idea of harsher sentencing relates to the use of the Death Penalty on certain crimes. Keeping the Capital Punishment as an option for certain crimes could produce lower crime rates each year due to the fact criminals could realize that a crime committed could cost them their own life through the justice system, thus adding fear into the mind of the criminals.
One reason this editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from the editorial
“Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.”
This quote is merely stating all of this money that was used or went to the use of the Death Penalty in North Carolina in the years of 2005 to 2006. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone to, we could assume that it would have gone to something that would have improved the society for the North Carolina natives. The problem which still would have existed is what would happen to all of the criminals that could have received the death penalty. Or even, what happens to all the crimes that could now occur in the state of North Carolina due to the fact that criminals now know that they cannot be given death for any crime, thus removing any real risk of a punishment from the state to the criminal.
What would happen in this case is that all of these criminals(new and old) would be placed into jail until their court date where they would be trialed and most likely be placed back into jail for a x amount of years. In this response, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of these new criminals. The funding for the production of most, if not all, of these jails would come from tax payers. That would only seem reasonable because if they didn’t, where would there criminals go? To South Carolina? Neighboring States? It would not seem logical for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state, due to the fact that crime rates have risen and they are unprepared for rise of criminals.
The other situation that could occur due to a rise of crime rates would be that the state would need to increase their authority and police forces to crack down on the increase crimes rates. Both creating more jails for an increase in criminals and giving more money for authorizes to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money being spent. This doesn’t include the jury and trial cost for all the new criminals. This being one possibility to the outcome of abandoning the Death penalty, it would result in a North Carolina paying for the creation of more jails, the installment of more authorizes, a society that would have to live with a high risk of crime in their neighborhood, and millions of dollars being dedicated to crime; all if North Carolina were to abandon the Death Penalty.
When a person is given the death penalty, it requires a lot of evidence to give a criminal the death penalty. Quoted from the web article Innocence and Death Penalty: The increasing danger of Executing the innocence”, Richard Dieter states “The danger that innocent people will be executed because of errors in the criminal justice system is getting worse. A total of 69 people have been released from death row since 1973 after evidence of their innocence emerged”. Richard, being the executive director the Death penalty information center, is stating that the possibility for recovering evidence to over turn the death penalty is possible, but rare. We hear the stories where some evidence was found at the last moment that released the criminal of the death penalty charge. This rarely happens and when it does happen, it sometimes can be evidence that could be controversial and can be questionable, but still allowed. Mistakes can happen throughout the long process. The end result of this process can mean the life of a human being, but we are all human beings and mistakes can be made. To say that since the Death Penalty process made a few mistakes throughout its long history of being used in the United States and that it should be abandoned because of these mistakes seems unfair.
The Capital punishment system was created for the people to ensure that every person who has a chance to receive the death penalty has a fair trial. The jury would hopefully be chosen to be unbiased towards race, economic status, etc. and each jury member would hopefully have the ability to understand the evidence to decide the verdict relating to the criminal. The evidence provided is assumed to be correct and complete. And if any of these credentials were not met or was flawed, the chance of someone receiving the death penalty would almost be zero. The problems that occur throughout the death penalty system are not caused by the system itself, but rather the people that are involved with it.
The reasons why this editorial stated to abandon the death penalty for the State of North Carolina would cause more harm than good for the natives of the state. The article addresses the idea of innocence people being convicted; bias juries or judges being a factor in the final verdict, and the total cost of having the death penalty as an option being the reasons why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment. But the author does overlook the fact that if he were to ban the death penalty, the state could end up to be a place where no one would want to live due to the rise in crime rates and no money going to improve the public through schools, parks, etc. The idea of banning the Death penalty will be a conversional subject that will always be argued against, but in my opinion, keeping the death penalty as an option will produce a safer and more economical society for the North Carolina natives to live in.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Reflection 1.1
When writing the argument, I felt that it was hard to keep focused when writing the rebuttal argument. After a while, I got a handle on choosing evidence from the original argument and being able to provide counter arguments for the original chosen evidence. I felt that citing sources in the paper seemed a lot more directional and easier after watching both of the tutorials. Before watching the tutorials, I felt I just threw quotes in my essay and I thought it was good enough, but now I know that I need an introduction and a summary for each quote I add into my argument. For the responses from my group members, I feel they stressed the idea of choosing more sources or sources that will provide more statistical information. Also, my group members thought I should state my opinion more often because it would help with the total argument. Ways I thought I could improve on my next essay was to provide some background information about the author and maybe the news paper provider. I decided to choose a smaller, more unknown news paper. This was because I felt that starting at the smaller news papers would result in a wider selection of one sided editorials that I could find a difference too. Another way I could improve my next draft is to find a couple more sources that relate to my argument. I felt that there were some areas in my argument were it just seemed like I was proposing a solution, but I really didn’t back up this solution with any statics or evidence that it could actually work in the real world. And in a rebuttal argument, the more evidence, the more convincing the paper is.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Essay 1.1(For the Death Penalty
Here is the Link to the Article: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/408/story/1171076.html
In the article “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process”, the author is encouraging the North Carolina natives to being to speak out and to try to ban Capital Punishment from the state of North Carolina. Within this editorial, the author takes Adam Liptak, of the New York Times, views of the reason why the Capital Punishment is flawed in the United States. Adam Stated “The system doesn't work because it cannot be reconciled with competing goals - the ability of juries to make independent decisions about who is sentenced to death, and fairness in a system that executes some and spares others who have committed similar crimes”. The idea that Adam is trying to propose to his readers is that the reasons why Capital Punishment should be removed from the United State’s Justice system is because he feels that Capital Punishment will not take into account how the juries feelings will affect the outcome of the final decision and that Capital punishment does not treat the same crimes fairly; in the sense that not all crimes will produce the same punishment.
I feel the exact opposite of what this editorial is trying to propose to its readers. I feel that Capital Punishment should be allowed in the United States. In a perfect world were greed and poverty aren’t major problems in our society, Capital Punishment would not be necessary and could be abandoned. But since we don’t live in a perfect world, I feel Capital punishment should still kept. Capital punishment can still be successful when the people who are in control of Capital punishment take proper steps and ensure that everything was done correctly to properly give someone the verdict of the death penalty.
In the United States, 34 states out of 50 allow the death penalty. This doesn’t mean that all of these states have executed prisoners. These states are just clearly stating that the death penalty is always an option for a serious crime that a person has committed. Here brings me to my first argument where Capital Punishment should be allowed. An editorial from the Washington Post titled “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason why crime rates are falling from the 2008 year to the 2009 year is because harsher sentencing to criminals have take many criminals off the streets. Also, the idea of harsher sentencing relates to the use of the Death Penalty on certain crimes. Keeping the Capital Punishment as an option for certain crimes could produce lower crime rates each year due to the fact criminals could realize that a crime committed could cost them their own life through the justice system, thus by adding fear into the mind of the criminals.
One reason this editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from the editorial “Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.” This quote is merely stating all of this money that was used or went to the use of the Death Penalty in North Carolina. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone to, we could assume that it would have gone to something that would have improved the society for the North Carolina natives. The problem which still would have existed is what would happen to all of the criminals that could have received the death penalty. Or even, what happens to all the crimes that could now occur in the state of North Carolina due to the fact that criminals now know that they cannot be given death for any crime.
What would happen in this case is that all of these criminals(new and old) would be placed into jail until their court date where they would be trialed and most likely be placed back into jail for a x amount of years. In this response, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of these new criminals. That would only seem reasonable because if they didn’t, where would there criminals go? To South Carolina? Neighboring States? It would not seem logical for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state. The other situation that could occur due to a rise of crime rates would be that the state would need to increase their authority and police forces to crack down on the increase crimes rates. Both creating more jails for an increase in criminals and giving more money for authorizes to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money. This doesn’t include the jury cost for all the new criminals. This being one possibility to the outcome of abandoning the Death penalty, it would result in a North Carolina paying for the creation of more jails, the installment of more authorizes, a society that would have to live with a high risk of crime in their neighborhood, and millions of dollars being dedicated to crime; all if North Carolina were to abandon the Death Penalty.
When a person is given the death penalty, it requires a lot of evidence to give a criminal the death penalty. This being said, the chance of receiving the death penalty is low. We hear the stories where some evidence was found at the last moment that released the criminal of the death penalty charge. This rarely happens and when it does happen, it sometimes can be evidence that could be controversial and can be questionable, but still allowed. Mistakes can happen throughout the long process. The end result of this process can mean the life of a human being, but we are all human beings and mistakes can be made. To say that since the Death Penalty process made a few mistakes throughout its long history of being used in the United States and that it should be abandoned because of these mistakes seems unfair. The Capital punishment system was created for the people to ensure that every person who has a chance to receive the death penalty has a fair trial. The jury would hopefully be chosen to be unbiased and each jury member would hopefully have the ability to understand the evidence to decided the verdict relating to the criminal. The evidence provided is assumed to me the correct and complete. And if any of these credentials were not met or was flawed, the chance of someone receiving the death penalty would almost be zero. The problems that occur throughout the death penalty system are not caused by the system itself, but rather the people that are involved with it.
The reasons why this editorial stated to abandon the death penalty for the State of North Carolina would cause more harm than good for the natives of the state and also financially for the state as well. The idea of banning the Death penalty will be a conversional subject that will always be argued against, but my eyes, keeping the death penalty as an option will in the long run produce a safer society for the whole United States to live in.
In the article “Death Penalty Systems “Irreversibility broken” North Carolina Should abandon a permanently flawed process”, the author is encouraging the North Carolina natives to being to speak out and to try to ban Capital Punishment from the state of North Carolina. Within this editorial, the author takes Adam Liptak, of the New York Times, views of the reason why the Capital Punishment is flawed in the United States. Adam Stated “The system doesn't work because it cannot be reconciled with competing goals - the ability of juries to make independent decisions about who is sentenced to death, and fairness in a system that executes some and spares others who have committed similar crimes”. The idea that Adam is trying to propose to his readers is that the reasons why Capital Punishment should be removed from the United State’s Justice system is because he feels that Capital Punishment will not take into account how the juries feelings will affect the outcome of the final decision and that Capital punishment does not treat the same crimes fairly; in the sense that not all crimes will produce the same punishment.
I feel the exact opposite of what this editorial is trying to propose to its readers. I feel that Capital Punishment should be allowed in the United States. In a perfect world were greed and poverty aren’t major problems in our society, Capital Punishment would not be necessary and could be abandoned. But since we don’t live in a perfect world, I feel Capital punishment should still kept. Capital punishment can still be successful when the people who are in control of Capital punishment take proper steps and ensure that everything was done correctly to properly give someone the verdict of the death penalty.
In the United States, 34 states out of 50 allow the death penalty. This doesn’t mean that all of these states have executed prisoners. These states are just clearly stating that the death penalty is always an option for a serious crime that a person has committed. Here brings me to my first argument where Capital Punishment should be allowed. An editorial from the Washington Post titled “Why are violent crimes rates falling?” stated that the reason why crime rates are falling from the 2008 year to the 2009 year is because harsher sentencing to criminals have take many criminals off the streets. Also, the idea of harsher sentencing relates to the use of the Death Penalty on certain crimes. Keeping the Capital Punishment as an option for certain crimes could produce lower crime rates each year due to the fact criminals could realize that a crime committed could cost them their own life through the justice system, thus by adding fear into the mind of the criminals.
One reason this editorial states why North Carolina should ban Capital Punishment is because of its “cost”. Quoted from the editorial “Professor Philip Cook in the Sanford School of Public Policy concluded that the state could save nearly $11 million each year in extra costs if it dropped the death penalty. His study found the state spent $21.6 million extra in taxpayer money on death penalty trials from 2005-06.” This quote is merely stating all of this money that was used or went to the use of the Death Penalty in North Carolina. Even though this quote didn’t state where this money could have gone to, we could assume that it would have gone to something that would have improved the society for the North Carolina natives. The problem which still would have existed is what would happen to all of the criminals that could have received the death penalty. Or even, what happens to all the crimes that could now occur in the state of North Carolina due to the fact that criminals now know that they cannot be given death for any crime.
What would happen in this case is that all of these criminals(new and old) would be placed into jail until their court date where they would be trialed and most likely be placed back into jail for a x amount of years. In this response, the state of North Carolina would have to build more jails to fit all of these new criminals. That would only seem reasonable because if they didn’t, where would there criminals go? To South Carolina? Neighboring States? It would not seem logical for North Carolina to send its criminals to another state. The other situation that could occur due to a rise of crime rates would be that the state would need to increase their authority and police forces to crack down on the increase crimes rates. Both creating more jails for an increase in criminals and giving more money for authorizes to crack down on higher crime rates would result in a lot of money. This doesn’t include the jury cost for all the new criminals. This being one possibility to the outcome of abandoning the Death penalty, it would result in a North Carolina paying for the creation of more jails, the installment of more authorizes, a society that would have to live with a high risk of crime in their neighborhood, and millions of dollars being dedicated to crime; all if North Carolina were to abandon the Death Penalty.
When a person is given the death penalty, it requires a lot of evidence to give a criminal the death penalty. This being said, the chance of receiving the death penalty is low. We hear the stories where some evidence was found at the last moment that released the criminal of the death penalty charge. This rarely happens and when it does happen, it sometimes can be evidence that could be controversial and can be questionable, but still allowed. Mistakes can happen throughout the long process. The end result of this process can mean the life of a human being, but we are all human beings and mistakes can be made. To say that since the Death Penalty process made a few mistakes throughout its long history of being used in the United States and that it should be abandoned because of these mistakes seems unfair. The Capital punishment system was created for the people to ensure that every person who has a chance to receive the death penalty has a fair trial. The jury would hopefully be chosen to be unbiased and each jury member would hopefully have the ability to understand the evidence to decided the verdict relating to the criminal. The evidence provided is assumed to me the correct and complete. And if any of these credentials were not met or was flawed, the chance of someone receiving the death penalty would almost be zero. The problems that occur throughout the death penalty system are not caused by the system itself, but rather the people that are involved with it.
The reasons why this editorial stated to abandon the death penalty for the State of North Carolina would cause more harm than good for the natives of the state and also financially for the state as well. The idea of banning the Death penalty will be a conversional subject that will always be argued against, but my eyes, keeping the death penalty as an option will in the long run produce a safer society for the whole United States to live in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)