The Critical Evaluation Essay The reason for this paper is to give a basic assessment of H.L. Mencken's work of "The Penalty of Death" in figuring out if it was effective or not and what the qualities and shortcomings are. By finishing this basic assessment, it won't just permit the article to be better comprehended and fathomed however will permit the genuine significance of the writer to be conveyed. On the off chance that this basic assessment is effective, one could just trust that the peruser would have the capacity to take profitable knowledge into the point in the wake of perusing the assessment. From finishing this task I have taken in a couple of new terms and implications which I can now apply to my perusing and composing that will …show more content…
Since the beginning of time the old saying of "Ye have heard that it was said, an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" (The Holy Bible) shows that capital punishment of execution as taught in the book of scriptures was polished thusly. Mencken expressed that uplifters contend on two most regular contentions that the occupation of an executioner and the witness is horrible business and revolting and that being sentenced to death is presently pointless, for it doesn't prevent others from the same wrongdoing (Phillips and Bostian, 524). Both of these two contentions have some legitimacy inside of the article which has both qualities and shortcomings that will be examined and displayed in …show more content…
The contention is powerless in that it is not bolstered by logos or genuine data that can be moved down. In any case, Mencken express that there is no proof of anybody performing the obligations of an executioner really grumbled about it and that he knew numerous inside of this workmanship who honed it gladly (Phillips and Bostian, 524). This has some legitimacy yet at the same time has no sponsorship or confirmation of the data. Another shortcoming with this contention is that Mencken does not invest much energy with the contention as he races through the subject to get to the second contention, which demonstrates an absence of sympathy toward this specific
Also, Jacoby implies that prisoners actually come out to be better criminals but if the american justice system uses the good ol fashion of flogging fewer of them will become life long felons because they would be embarrassed and hurt and is much more cheaper than paying 30,000 to keep prisoners in cages and giving them a place to stay with three meals a day. Jacoby uses
Editor Anna Quindlen wrote many articles and essays conveying her opinion toward the death penalty. Such as, “Death Penalty Fails to Equal Retribution” and “Public & Private; The High Cost of Death”. Although Anna Quindlen makes many valuable accusations regarding her reasoning to being opposed to the death penalty, she undermines the real purpose of the penalty itself. The Death penalty, is indeed necessary. Many of the accusations Anna proclaims permit to the emotions of the victims families that have been robbed of their loved one by the said killer.
The author claims that the argument against capital punishment based on the possibility of executing an innocent person is intellectually and morally shallow. He also claims that abolitionists who use this argument are intellectually dishonest because they accept other social policies that lead to the death of innocent individuals. Prager claims that murderers who are not executed have already murdered innocent people, and the possibility of escape from prison means that they threaten even more innocent lives. Additionally, he claims that abolishing capital punishment does not necessarily protect innocent lives because murderers who are not executed may continue to kill. Finally, the author argues that abolitionists should acknowledge their responsibility for innocent lives lost due to murderers who were not executed and state their genuine belief that murderers should never be
In this paper, I am going to discuss the issue of the death penalty. Christians have been debating against the death penalty for a long time. In the book, Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context, David Gushee and Glen Stassen have established some interesting arguments and key factors that Christians might would like to use to continue their debate against the death penalty. I am going to lay out Gushee’s and Stassen’s arguments and focus on the reasons they give for being against the death penalty. They focus on Christlikeness, Powers and Authorities, Forgiveness, and Mission of the Church.
Sherman Alexie’s “Capital Punishment” made me feel sad when reading it. I have always believed that America can do something other than execution of criminals. Something that surprised me in this poem was when the speaker says, “but the killer doesn’t want much: baked potato, salad, tall glass of ice water” (3-4). I always thought of criminal’s last meals being extravagant. I always thought their last meal would be expensive and something they don’t have very often.
In Henry Louis Menken’s essay “The Penalty of Death,” he refutes two of the most commonly heard arguments against capital punishment. He believes that capital punishment is justified, it’s not for revenge but for, as he puts it “Katharsis” for the immediate victim and the moral of others. Katharsis meaning the process of releasing strong emotions. For the argument that executing a criminal is degrading for those who have to act upon it or the viewer; his rebuttal is that “the work of a hang man is unpleasant” (464) but it’s a necessary job furthermore he has heard no complaint from a “hangman” additionally some are delighted about the custom and practice proudly. The second argument is the that death penalty is useless because it does not deter
The prisoners had seen and experienced so much brutality, endured repeated beatings, and humiliated beyond imagination, so one more death did not affect them. Their emotions hardened to the point of being non-existent… or so they thought. Although the prisoners seemed hardened and unaffected by death, a different hanging did deeply affect them.
Pojman’s argument against the objections to capital punishment is not completely valid. If we understand the human being, we can also understand that humans are spiteful people and many people are filled with the hopes of revenge. Therefore, the thirst of revenge could potentially be a contributing factor as to why people are for the death penalty. Even if Pojman doesn’t believe in revenge, it should not be a valid reason for him to ignore its potential in justice and decision making during trials. This world is already filled with bitterness towards one another and we, as a society, cannot stop it because we all have different morals.
“An eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” said the Bible about justice but it also says “You shall not murder,” so is morally accepted the murder to a murderer? The topic in discussion is whether should the death penalty be banned or allowed, if taking the life of a criminal is a necessary punishment. The article of The Editors "Ban the Death Penalty” is based on facts and analysis about how the death penalty is not proved to deter crimes. However, Adrianne Haslet-Davis’s article, "Why the Death Penalty Should Live" does not sustain her thoughts with information. Furthermore, The Editor advocated their article with information of the possible consequences of this punishment to show better their point when Haslet-Davis just shares her experience and beliefs missing to provide specific data.
Thus, the ritual of stoning an individual to death, as in the instance of Tessie Hutchinson, has been practiced as far back as ancient Greece; the stoning of Lycidas who thought it was best to receive the offer brought to them by Murychides and lay it before the People (Blackwell). The stoning of a local shares similarities with the Salem Witch Trails where individuals were condemned by an entire village solely based on the belief that they are witches; the kind of outlandish belief that if someone is not stoned every summer then the village will not yield crops. Such traditions and beliefs seem absurd in today’s society due in part to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was adopted in 1948 by the United Nations. The senseless murder of individuals grounded in tradition no longer suffices However, Some people hold to the old mumpsimous that tradition should be preserved: “Pack of crazy fools… There's always been a lottery” (Jackson 4).
In Darrow’s closing argument he gives his famed “A Plea for Mercy” to the judge. This plea not only acted as a conclusion to his defense, but it also acted as an introduction the eradication of the death penalty. Darrow uses a mix of ethos, pathos, logos, and other rhetorical devices to impose a merciful effect on his audience in hopes to reduce his clients punishment and the use of capital punishment. Darrow gracefully uses all three appeals when referring to the rise of crime after war “I know that it has followed every war; and I know it has influenced these boys so that life was not the same to them as it would have been if the world had not been made red with blood.
Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty. " In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal.
Annotated Bibliography Draft Student name : Haider Zafaryab Student number: 2360526 Thesis Statement : Capital Punishment is a very controversial topic around the globe. I believe that it does more harm than good and breeds violence in society. Source 1: Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996).
Rhetorical Analysis of “A Hanging” In his personal narrative, “A Hanging”, George Orwell, a renowned British author, who often used his talents to criticize injustice and totalitarianism, describes an execution he witnessed in Burma while serving as an officer in the British Imperial Police. Originally published in The Adelphi, a British magazine, in 1931, the piece was written for educated, politically aware people in England, in hopes of provoking questions regarding the morality of capital punishment, and perhaps imperialist society overall, in those benefitting from such a system. Although he died nearly seventy years ago, his works are still influential and relevant today. Using vivid descriptions and a somber tone, Orwell recreates his experience in a tense narration that clearly shows his thesis concerning the value of human life and the wrongness inherent to a system that dismisses it so casually.
The death penalty is a punishment of execution, given to someone legally convicted of a capital crime. The death penalty laws were established in the 18th century B.C when king Hammaurabi of Babylon instituted the law for 25 different crimes. In Jewish history the death penalty could only be given after trail by the Sanhedrin, which was composed of twenty-three judges. There were four different ways the death penalty was imposed on an individual, these were burning, stoning, strangling and slaying (Talmud). In today’s society most countries have abolished the death penalty due to various reasons such as unfair justice, but others still have it in place, for example some states in The United States of America.