Monday, March 22, 2010
Reflection 2.2
For my second draft, I felt my thoughts were clearer on this paper. I feel this paper is a lot better than my first one and I do have a lot more sources that work towards my paper. I need to ask a couple of questions about my academic sources, but other than that, I should almost be set on my sources. I remember at group conferences that many people said my opinion was missing and that I was not taking a stand at any point. I made it clear what stand I was going to take for this paper. I still have some questions about the rogerian idea of the argument. I am just not sure if my paper is rogerian enough. Like I try not to point fingers and I do have a compromise at the end. I try to set up situations where it explains the problem of the death penalty and leave them open ended, but I feel that is not enough for a rogerian argument. That is the main problem I feel my paper is going through.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
2.2 Against the Death Penalty
I was raised to cherish all life, but at the same time I was taught at a young age that bad behavior will result in negative consequences from my parents and teachers. My childhood reflects these beliefs. I was always a good boy who mostly did what was right and after realizing some actions were wrong, did not do them again. My childhood learning of good and bad differs much from the real world. This can be seen within the death penalty. The death penalty takes what I have learned to the next level. The issue that covers the death penalty is what should a criminal receive for a serious case of murder? Do we as a state cherish life over justice? Or do we take a page out of the rules of Hammurabi and use the old saying “An eye for an eye”?
At the age of 31, Paul Powell was recently put to death by the state of Virginia using the electric chair (Stewart 1). Paul Powell was given the death penalty because of the rape and murder of a 16 year old girl. Paul Powell was originally sentenced in 2000 and was convicted with murder, but that was overturned. After this incident, Paul Powell decided to write a letter bragging about the crime he committed and explains in some detail what he did that night of the crime. This became new evidence and he was later convicted of murder and given the death penalty in 2003. The idea that this man was originally given the wrong sentence explains some of the flaws of the judicial process.
Since 1973, when the death penalty was reinstated in a majority of the states, a total of 135 inmates have been released from the death row and are now considered innocence. (Death Penalty 101) All of these verdicts were overturned due to new DNA evidence that revealed the criminal was innocence to begin with. It is easy feel remorse for the criminals that spent a good portion of their life in jail, but no one realizes the problem of these people wasting their lives in the correctional system. This is due to the people who made the mistakes of conviction not admitting to their flawed decision. As a result, no one will ever be blamed when a situation like this occurs. This also brings up new ideas about how inaccurate the death penalty process can be.
An issue that is connected with the death penalty is the execution of people with mental retardation problems. The academic journal “Standford-Binet and WAIS IQ differences and their implications for adults with intellectual disability”, “People with ID (mental retardation) convicted of capital crimes are no longer subject to the death penalty.” (Wayne 1) This quote sums up how the death penalty process in the United States deals with people who have mental retardation problems. Many people, including myself, consider the death penalty cruel and immoral. I believe a person with mental problems could have not understood the crimes and actions they commit. If this is the case, the system could be killing a person of society who did not know what he/she was doing wrong. But at the same time, there have been accusations of people pretending to have mental problems to avoid the death penalty. It was estimated that 35 people have been executed with mental retardation problems since 1977 (Reynolds 1). It is “estimated” because there are some cases where a mental retardation can be very mild or could be overlooked by the system. Even with many laws being added to protect people with mental retardation against the death penalty, the issue of execution of people with mental retardation problems can be argued both ways when discussing the sides of the death penalty.
When talking about the death penalty, there are many issues that force people to choose one side. However, these same issues that force people to choose a side sometimes makes other people stuck on what side to choose. These issues include the execution of people with mental retardation, the idea that a jury could be bias, that evidence could be flawed, and many more. These issues are the reasons why the death penalty is controversial in the United States.
There are many arguments that could be made for or against using the death penalty. I feel the United States is better off not using the death penalty. The death penalty does not cherish the life of criminals and does not make fair and equal judgments on all criminals that go through the judicial process. Also, I feel there could be bias within the people who run the process, which creates an unfair trial and could result in a wrong verdict. The main reason I don’t agree with the death penalty is because the people placed in prisons have a chance to change their views and ways of life. To give someone another chance to change their way of life seems like a better option than taking their life away. I am not saying the people that support the death penalty do not care about the life of others, but I feel the supporters of the death penalty value justice and fairness over life.
There is inconsistency with the consequences assigned for similar actions. For example, a person who commits murder can get 10 years in jail and another person who commits murder can receive the death penalty. Could that be due to the way the murderer killed his victim? Could it have been the type of person he killed? In the end, the result is exactly the same, a person was murdered. From the Charlotte Observer News Paper article Death Penalty System “irretrievably” broken, the article stated, “there was no way to ensure essential fairness and consistency of the system (death penalty) because it produces such widely varying results. (“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’” 2)” It doesn’t seem fair that one murder could receive the death penalty for killing a person and another person could receive 10 years. The death penalty system is not fair to all criminals.
In the United States, a person can only receive the death penalty by a jury of people making a unanimous decision. People can receive the death penalty through unfair trials because the bias jury members could have and racial stereotypes that the jury members could have brought into the courtroom. Jury members are screened and asked questions in order to prevent any them from having any bias towards a person or race, but in reality bias can’t ever be prevented. It’s not that they are all racist, but all people have some idea of a certain type of person or race. These ideas could be positive or negative ideas, but it is nearly impossible to find a jury full of people who are not bias. From the Death penalty Information Center, an example of a bias towards African Americans can be seen in this quote, “careful analysis of race and death penalty … which reveals that the odds of receiving a death sentence are nearly four times (3.9) higher if the defendant is black. (Dieter 3)” This quote explains an existing bias towards African Americans in some regions in the Untied States. In 2006, a total of 649 African Americans were executed in all the states that allow the death penalty (“Capital Punishment, 2006- Statistical Tables”). It is unknown if those African Americans received a fair trial with an unbiased jury. The idea that people can be bias towards other people and come to a decision that produces a wrongful death sentence makes the idea of using the death penalty less appealing.
The main reason the United States has jails is to house criminals and keep them away from society. If the main goal of jails is to protect the society, criminals should be kept in jail forever. This idea does seem stretched, but another reason for jails is to allow people to change. Jails, also known as correctional facilities, can be the perfect environment for criminals to change their lives before reentering the general public. These criminals are isolated from the general public and placed into an environment where everyone around them has committed crimes and has done bad. Being able to see who criminals really are can inspire inmates to change who they want to be. To give someone the death penalty is essentially robbing a person’s ability to change their life. There are people who prefer to see people executed because of the crimes they have committed, but a person who is able to realize what he/she has done will result in a better ending, even if the criminal never gets out of jail.
There are arguments that could be made to end the use of the death penalty. But supporters of the death penalty will believe the system is fair for all crimes that are committed. They also believe that the screenings for the jury members are suffice in determining if a person will or will not receive a death sentence without bias. There are many creditable reasons why people should support the death penalty. The main reason is that people support the death penalty is because they believe in justice. These supporters want the public to see that the United States is a land that is fair and serves justice to all their criminals. The death penalty is one way they are able to accomplish this.
The death penalty has left the nation divided. While researching this topic, it was realized that a compromise can never be made with the idea of executing a criminal for their crime. However, things can be changed about how the criminal is executed and different verdicts other than the death sentence. Rather than being executed, more people can be placed into jail with a life sentence. This is the only compromise that can ever be made with the issue of executing someone or not executing someone. Even though it will cost tax payer more to keep these criminals in jail, it is the only way to satisfy both sides. Another option could be the method of execution. The current methods of execution are electric chair, lethal injection, hanging, firing squad and lethal gas (“Methods of Execution” 1). The best thing to do is to eliminate the inhumane methods of execution and to only use lethal injection. The lethal injection process was created with the intent to provide the criminal a painless death. The most moral thing to give to a criminal should be humane and painless death. This also ties into the idea that relates with public executions. The idea that the criminal knows that many people are watching him die can make him suffer mentally. From the academic journal “Neither Justice nor Mercy: Public and Private Executions in Rhode Island,” the idea of public executions and its history through the state of Rhode Island is explained. It explains that originally people were supporting the idea of public executions through “hangings”. But in the end, the novel explains how people decided to step in to abolish these “unruly behaviors” (Chambers 1). With these suggestions, I feel more people will have fewer arguments about the death penalty.
The issue of the death penalty will always be a controversial one in the United States. This is because the extremes can never be combined into one solution. But with some changing and some compromising, many people would not disagree with each other about the death penalty anymore.
“Capital Punishment, 2006- Statistical Tables”. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2006. Office of Justice Programs. Web March 10, 2010
Chambers, Stephen. “Neither Justice nor Mercy: Public and Private Executions in Rhode Island” New England Quarterly. September 2009. EBSCO Host Web March 10, 2010
“Death Penalty 101”. American Civil Liberties Union. April 7, 2007. American Civil Liberties Union. Web March 10, 2010“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’”. Charlotte Observer. March 21, 2010. Charlotte Observer. Web March 10, 2010
“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’”. Charlotte Observer. March 21, 2010. Charlotte Observer. Web March 10, 2010
Dieter, Richard. “The Death Penalty in Black and White; who lives, Who Dies, Who Decides” The Death Penalty Information Center. The Death Penalty Information Center. Web March 10, 2010
“Methods of Execution”. Prosecuting Attorney. The Clark County. Web March 10, 2010
Reynolds, Dave. “Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty in the U.S.A”. Ragged Online. May 1, 2001. Ragged Online. Web March 10, 2010
Silverman, Wayne. “Standford-Binet and WAIS IQ differences and their implications for adults with intellectual disability”. March 2010. EBSCO Host. Web March 10, 2010
Stewart, Amanda. “Paul Powell Dies in electric Chair”. Inside NoVa. March 18, 2010. News and Messengers. Web March 10, 2010
At the age of 31, Paul Powell was recently put to death by the state of Virginia using the electric chair (Stewart 1). Paul Powell was given the death penalty because of the rape and murder of a 16 year old girl. Paul Powell was originally sentenced in 2000 and was convicted with murder, but that was overturned. After this incident, Paul Powell decided to write a letter bragging about the crime he committed and explains in some detail what he did that night of the crime. This became new evidence and he was later convicted of murder and given the death penalty in 2003. The idea that this man was originally given the wrong sentence explains some of the flaws of the judicial process.
Since 1973, when the death penalty was reinstated in a majority of the states, a total of 135 inmates have been released from the death row and are now considered innocence. (Death Penalty 101) All of these verdicts were overturned due to new DNA evidence that revealed the criminal was innocence to begin with. It is easy feel remorse for the criminals that spent a good portion of their life in jail, but no one realizes the problem of these people wasting their lives in the correctional system. This is due to the people who made the mistakes of conviction not admitting to their flawed decision. As a result, no one will ever be blamed when a situation like this occurs. This also brings up new ideas about how inaccurate the death penalty process can be.
An issue that is connected with the death penalty is the execution of people with mental retardation problems. The academic journal “Standford-Binet and WAIS IQ differences and their implications for adults with intellectual disability”, “People with ID (mental retardation) convicted of capital crimes are no longer subject to the death penalty.” (Wayne 1) This quote sums up how the death penalty process in the United States deals with people who have mental retardation problems. Many people, including myself, consider the death penalty cruel and immoral. I believe a person with mental problems could have not understood the crimes and actions they commit. If this is the case, the system could be killing a person of society who did not know what he/she was doing wrong. But at the same time, there have been accusations of people pretending to have mental problems to avoid the death penalty. It was estimated that 35 people have been executed with mental retardation problems since 1977 (Reynolds 1). It is “estimated” because there are some cases where a mental retardation can be very mild or could be overlooked by the system. Even with many laws being added to protect people with mental retardation against the death penalty, the issue of execution of people with mental retardation problems can be argued both ways when discussing the sides of the death penalty.
When talking about the death penalty, there are many issues that force people to choose one side. However, these same issues that force people to choose a side sometimes makes other people stuck on what side to choose. These issues include the execution of people with mental retardation, the idea that a jury could be bias, that evidence could be flawed, and many more. These issues are the reasons why the death penalty is controversial in the United States.
There are many arguments that could be made for or against using the death penalty. I feel the United States is better off not using the death penalty. The death penalty does not cherish the life of criminals and does not make fair and equal judgments on all criminals that go through the judicial process. Also, I feel there could be bias within the people who run the process, which creates an unfair trial and could result in a wrong verdict. The main reason I don’t agree with the death penalty is because the people placed in prisons have a chance to change their views and ways of life. To give someone another chance to change their way of life seems like a better option than taking their life away. I am not saying the people that support the death penalty do not care about the life of others, but I feel the supporters of the death penalty value justice and fairness over life.
There is inconsistency with the consequences assigned for similar actions. For example, a person who commits murder can get 10 years in jail and another person who commits murder can receive the death penalty. Could that be due to the way the murderer killed his victim? Could it have been the type of person he killed? In the end, the result is exactly the same, a person was murdered. From the Charlotte Observer News Paper article Death Penalty System “irretrievably” broken, the article stated, “there was no way to ensure essential fairness and consistency of the system (death penalty) because it produces such widely varying results. (“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’” 2)” It doesn’t seem fair that one murder could receive the death penalty for killing a person and another person could receive 10 years. The death penalty system is not fair to all criminals.
In the United States, a person can only receive the death penalty by a jury of people making a unanimous decision. People can receive the death penalty through unfair trials because the bias jury members could have and racial stereotypes that the jury members could have brought into the courtroom. Jury members are screened and asked questions in order to prevent any them from having any bias towards a person or race, but in reality bias can’t ever be prevented. It’s not that they are all racist, but all people have some idea of a certain type of person or race. These ideas could be positive or negative ideas, but it is nearly impossible to find a jury full of people who are not bias. From the Death penalty Information Center, an example of a bias towards African Americans can be seen in this quote, “careful analysis of race and death penalty … which reveals that the odds of receiving a death sentence are nearly four times (3.9) higher if the defendant is black. (Dieter 3)” This quote explains an existing bias towards African Americans in some regions in the Untied States. In 2006, a total of 649 African Americans were executed in all the states that allow the death penalty (“Capital Punishment, 2006- Statistical Tables”). It is unknown if those African Americans received a fair trial with an unbiased jury. The idea that people can be bias towards other people and come to a decision that produces a wrongful death sentence makes the idea of using the death penalty less appealing.
The main reason the United States has jails is to house criminals and keep them away from society. If the main goal of jails is to protect the society, criminals should be kept in jail forever. This idea does seem stretched, but another reason for jails is to allow people to change. Jails, also known as correctional facilities, can be the perfect environment for criminals to change their lives before reentering the general public. These criminals are isolated from the general public and placed into an environment where everyone around them has committed crimes and has done bad. Being able to see who criminals really are can inspire inmates to change who they want to be. To give someone the death penalty is essentially robbing a person’s ability to change their life. There are people who prefer to see people executed because of the crimes they have committed, but a person who is able to realize what he/she has done will result in a better ending, even if the criminal never gets out of jail.
There are arguments that could be made to end the use of the death penalty. But supporters of the death penalty will believe the system is fair for all crimes that are committed. They also believe that the screenings for the jury members are suffice in determining if a person will or will not receive a death sentence without bias. There are many creditable reasons why people should support the death penalty. The main reason is that people support the death penalty is because they believe in justice. These supporters want the public to see that the United States is a land that is fair and serves justice to all their criminals. The death penalty is one way they are able to accomplish this.
The death penalty has left the nation divided. While researching this topic, it was realized that a compromise can never be made with the idea of executing a criminal for their crime. However, things can be changed about how the criminal is executed and different verdicts other than the death sentence. Rather than being executed, more people can be placed into jail with a life sentence. This is the only compromise that can ever be made with the issue of executing someone or not executing someone. Even though it will cost tax payer more to keep these criminals in jail, it is the only way to satisfy both sides. Another option could be the method of execution. The current methods of execution are electric chair, lethal injection, hanging, firing squad and lethal gas (“Methods of Execution” 1). The best thing to do is to eliminate the inhumane methods of execution and to only use lethal injection. The lethal injection process was created with the intent to provide the criminal a painless death. The most moral thing to give to a criminal should be humane and painless death. This also ties into the idea that relates with public executions. The idea that the criminal knows that many people are watching him die can make him suffer mentally. From the academic journal “Neither Justice nor Mercy: Public and Private Executions in Rhode Island,” the idea of public executions and its history through the state of Rhode Island is explained. It explains that originally people were supporting the idea of public executions through “hangings”. But in the end, the novel explains how people decided to step in to abolish these “unruly behaviors” (Chambers 1). With these suggestions, I feel more people will have fewer arguments about the death penalty.
The issue of the death penalty will always be a controversial one in the United States. This is because the extremes can never be combined into one solution. But with some changing and some compromising, many people would not disagree with each other about the death penalty anymore.
“Capital Punishment, 2006- Statistical Tables”. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2006. Office of Justice Programs. Web March 10, 2010
Chambers, Stephen. “Neither Justice nor Mercy: Public and Private Executions in Rhode Island” New England Quarterly. September 2009. EBSCO Host Web March 10, 2010
“Death Penalty 101”. American Civil Liberties Union. April 7, 2007. American Civil Liberties Union. Web March 10, 2010“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’”. Charlotte Observer. March 21, 2010. Charlotte Observer. Web March 10, 2010
“Death Penalty system ‘irretrievably broken’”. Charlotte Observer. March 21, 2010. Charlotte Observer. Web March 10, 2010
Dieter, Richard. “The Death Penalty in Black and White; who lives, Who Dies, Who Decides” The Death Penalty Information Center. The Death Penalty Information Center. Web March 10, 2010
“Methods of Execution”. Prosecuting Attorney. The Clark County. Web March 10, 2010
Reynolds, Dave. “Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty in the U.S.A”. Ragged Online. May 1, 2001. Ragged Online. Web March 10, 2010
Silverman, Wayne. “Standford-Binet and WAIS IQ differences and their implications for adults with intellectual disability”. March 2010. EBSCO Host. Web March 10, 2010
Stewart, Amanda. “Paul Powell Dies in electric Chair”. Inside NoVa. March 18, 2010. News and Messengers. Web March 10, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Reflection 2.1
For my reflection, the first thought about writing this was that it was going to be easy. It was nothing close to easy. I had so many questions I had to ask and look up before I could get a close idea of what the paper was suppose to sound like and look like. I thought I was going to use the examples in class, but I remembered the some of the examples in class were more semi rogerian works. I felt I just didn’t get a template of what a rogerian piece of work was suppose to have. I tried to follow guides that explain what was needed for each section of the paper, but I still felt it was a lot harder than the rebuttal. That really sums up the problems while writing the paper that I had, but the second problem I had was the topic. I just wasn’t sure if I was allowed or should do the death penalty again. I felt it would be a good idea to write another style of paper for the same topic, but also to choose the other side so I get a whole different perspective. If I am allowed to, ill probably keep with death penalty again, but I would just change my perspective on the issue. I feel I had a lot of trouble (and it did reflect on my first draft) because I just haven’t read many of these arguments. Like it was stated in class, it is a style of writing that isn’t used all the time. I just have to get to read more and get a feel on how to construct these papers and how they are suppose to feel. This is the one thing I feel I am struggling on the most.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
2.1 Death Penalty rogerian
How do you tell someone that in X amount of years, they will die? When he/she ask why they are going to die, what would you say? You could give them a long explanation about what they did and what effect it had on many people in a society, or you could just tell them it was a crime that they were committed. Either way, this is the basics of the death penalty. The death penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is the verdict of death to a person who is proven to have committed a serious crime or crimes. These crimes tend to be murders of different degrees. What makes the death penalty so controversial is what makes our individual values all so different from each other. Everyone values different things and/or values things over other issues. Some people will value life over anything in the world. This could be coupled with people that value justice and fairness in our society. Either way, we can see that the death penalty is an issue is not just a split decision in the United States, but also an issue in many other nations around the world.
A majority of states do support the death penalty to be a possible verdict given to criminals in their state. The reasons why these states support the death penalty is because they believe in a judicial system that will mirror the severity of the crimes committed. A state that supports the death penalty will also favor the protection of people in the community and the fairness and justice towards the criminals. This does not mean that states who don’t the support the death penalty don’t care for the protection of the people and the fairness towards criminals, it is just they favor different methods and believe in different ways to carry out sentencing towards criminals and their committed crimes.
I feel I am a person who is stuck in the middle of all arguing and disagreement about the death penalty. If you were to ask me right now whether I was for or against the use of the death penalty, I would be stuck in between both sides. I feel my answer towards the question at hand would not be single side. Rather, my answer would have to be a combination of both current solutions. I feel that with the problems that can be coupled with the death penalty, which can be people being given the death penalty off non credible information, racial profiling, carelessness of life, etc, and the negatives of not having the death penalty, which can be increased crime rates and increase funding for more jails, the answer must come with a mixture of the two current solutions that deal with criminals that have committed serious crimes.
The people who support the death penalty, which is a majority of the states, feel the positives of keeping the death penalty out weights the issues that people against the death penalty make public. The main issues that people against the death penalty state are that the death penalty is unethical, cruel, expensive and not necessary. This doesn’t mean that people who are supporting the death penalty are cruel monsters who have a lot of money. It could be the complete opposite. People who support the death penalty believe in the semi opposites of these claims. They believe that the death penalty process is a fair process that is sufficient in allowing a person to be killed by the government because of his/her actions and any method of execution should be allowed varying from state to state.
There are many reasons for people to be on the other side of the fence of the death penalty. I feel people who are against the death penalty value life and the emotions of many parties related to the people involved with the crime (victims, criminals and their family). Quoted from the webpage balanced politics, which is a website that tries to explain the controversial issues of today’s government and society, “It is barbaric and violates the cruel and usual clause in the Bill of Rights”? People against the death penalty will believe that the government is murdering criminals for serious crimes by the main method of 3 injections or could use the less common method of the electric chair. Either way, the same results are the same. These methods could be called barbaric because if you could realize and feel the pain that the criminal would go through, you would basically be dead. The reason why the electric chair is considered to be a less common method is because the shear thought to execute a human being with the use of volts and electricity plans into the stereotype of torture, which is always a negative though in the United States. The more common 3 injection is a system that was created to make the person receiving the lethal injection feels no pain throughout the whole process. The problem and idea of receiving no pain throughout the whole process is we could never know if the human being will feel pain or not. From the Death Penalty Information Center, the lethal injections consist of 3 liquids that are injected into the person. The first is sodium pentothal which basically puts a person into a claim state of mind. The second is a pancuronium bromide that will cause the body to be paralyzed and will result in the person feeling no pain with the third liquid is injected. And the third liquid is potassium chloride which is the thing that will cause death by stopping the heart. Some experts believe that the pancuronium bromide will not be enough to cause a painless death. These are just two explanations of why people believe the death penalty is considered barbaric and cruel.
What is so wrong about killing a person who killed another person? If this is to be a true fact, why isn’t everyone who has committed murder to another human being killed through the government? This is another reason why people argue about the death penalty. How do you determine the extent of whether a person should receive the death penalty? People who don’t support the death penalty say that no one should receive the death penalty for any crimes they committed, even if it the murder could have been extreme and cruel to the victim and their family. On the other hand, people who support the death penalty believe that a jury of people who have been screened and been considered qualified are able to determine whether a person should receive the death penalty or just jail time for a murder committed. Either way you decide to look at it, there will be more issues and more complaints that cover either choice.
Like I stated earlier, I sit on the fence. I know most people think you have to be one way or the other, but I still feel stuck. To make a solution for myself, I should try to compromise between both sides and make a whole new system that satisfies everyone. But I see no possible way to combine both of these solutions. Either way, the end result is someone will die or someone will stay in jail. If you decide to keep the death penalty, there will probably never be a way to ensure a person die a painless death. If you decide to remove the death penalty, you could be seen as a nation who does not have a fair system and a nation that treats criminals very nicely.
This topic will constantly be argued and the possibility of finding a compromise between both sides will probably never be found, but overtime this issue will naturally come to a settlement.
http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/lethal-injection-moratorium-executions-ends-after-supreme-court-decision
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/01/10/1171076/death-penalty-system-irretrievably.html <--- Opinion
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
A majority of states do support the death penalty to be a possible verdict given to criminals in their state. The reasons why these states support the death penalty is because they believe in a judicial system that will mirror the severity of the crimes committed. A state that supports the death penalty will also favor the protection of people in the community and the fairness and justice towards the criminals. This does not mean that states who don’t the support the death penalty don’t care for the protection of the people and the fairness towards criminals, it is just they favor different methods and believe in different ways to carry out sentencing towards criminals and their committed crimes.
I feel I am a person who is stuck in the middle of all arguing and disagreement about the death penalty. If you were to ask me right now whether I was for or against the use of the death penalty, I would be stuck in between both sides. I feel my answer towards the question at hand would not be single side. Rather, my answer would have to be a combination of both current solutions. I feel that with the problems that can be coupled with the death penalty, which can be people being given the death penalty off non credible information, racial profiling, carelessness of life, etc, and the negatives of not having the death penalty, which can be increased crime rates and increase funding for more jails, the answer must come with a mixture of the two current solutions that deal with criminals that have committed serious crimes.
The people who support the death penalty, which is a majority of the states, feel the positives of keeping the death penalty out weights the issues that people against the death penalty make public. The main issues that people against the death penalty state are that the death penalty is unethical, cruel, expensive and not necessary. This doesn’t mean that people who are supporting the death penalty are cruel monsters who have a lot of money. It could be the complete opposite. People who support the death penalty believe in the semi opposites of these claims. They believe that the death penalty process is a fair process that is sufficient in allowing a person to be killed by the government because of his/her actions and any method of execution should be allowed varying from state to state.
There are many reasons for people to be on the other side of the fence of the death penalty. I feel people who are against the death penalty value life and the emotions of many parties related to the people involved with the crime (victims, criminals and their family). Quoted from the webpage balanced politics, which is a website that tries to explain the controversial issues of today’s government and society, “It is barbaric and violates the cruel and usual clause in the Bill of Rights”? People against the death penalty will believe that the government is murdering criminals for serious crimes by the main method of 3 injections or could use the less common method of the electric chair. Either way, the same results are the same. These methods could be called barbaric because if you could realize and feel the pain that the criminal would go through, you would basically be dead. The reason why the electric chair is considered to be a less common method is because the shear thought to execute a human being with the use of volts and electricity plans into the stereotype of torture, which is always a negative though in the United States. The more common 3 injection is a system that was created to make the person receiving the lethal injection feels no pain throughout the whole process. The problem and idea of receiving no pain throughout the whole process is we could never know if the human being will feel pain or not. From the Death Penalty Information Center, the lethal injections consist of 3 liquids that are injected into the person. The first is sodium pentothal which basically puts a person into a claim state of mind. The second is a pancuronium bromide that will cause the body to be paralyzed and will result in the person feeling no pain with the third liquid is injected. And the third liquid is potassium chloride which is the thing that will cause death by stopping the heart. Some experts believe that the pancuronium bromide will not be enough to cause a painless death. These are just two explanations of why people believe the death penalty is considered barbaric and cruel.
What is so wrong about killing a person who killed another person? If this is to be a true fact, why isn’t everyone who has committed murder to another human being killed through the government? This is another reason why people argue about the death penalty. How do you determine the extent of whether a person should receive the death penalty? People who don’t support the death penalty say that no one should receive the death penalty for any crimes they committed, even if it the murder could have been extreme and cruel to the victim and their family. On the other hand, people who support the death penalty believe that a jury of people who have been screened and been considered qualified are able to determine whether a person should receive the death penalty or just jail time for a murder committed. Either way you decide to look at it, there will be more issues and more complaints that cover either choice.
Like I stated earlier, I sit on the fence. I know most people think you have to be one way or the other, but I still feel stuck. To make a solution for myself, I should try to compromise between both sides and make a whole new system that satisfies everyone. But I see no possible way to combine both of these solutions. Either way, the end result is someone will die or someone will stay in jail. If you decide to keep the death penalty, there will probably never be a way to ensure a person die a painless death. If you decide to remove the death penalty, you could be seen as a nation who does not have a fair system and a nation that treats criminals very nicely.
This topic will constantly be argued and the possibility of finding a compromise between both sides will probably never be found, but overtime this issue will naturally come to a settlement.
http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/lethal-injection-moratorium-executions-ends-after-supreme-court-decision
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/01/10/1171076/death-penalty-system-irretrievably.html <--- Opinion
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
Friday, March 5, 2010
Pre Writing Essay 2
Topics I would consider are death penalty, abortion, taxes, etc. I feel there are many topics that would be excellent choices for this essay because all that is mainly needed is the other side. Something in me wants to do death penalty again for this paper. I felt that when I was doing my rebuttal, it was hard for me to sit on one side of the fence. I was never a person who stated my views for the death penalty because I am stuck on which way that argument could go. So with this being an argument that embraces the idea of using both sides to your advantages, I feel the idea of the death penalty is almost the best topic possible. But at the same time, I wouldn’t want to overdue the idea of death penalty because I bet a lot of the other students would consider writing about the death penalty as well. There are many other options as well that I can choose for this argument, but I might go with a not so well known idea. These ideas could be like how effective is taxes, etc.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)