The Death Penalty: Acceptable? Or not?
Assignment:
● Choose a topic
● Find two opinionated, opposing articles
● Compare and write about arguments included in each text
● Explore the effect of language, punctuation, grammar choices…
● Finally, write a discursive response.
Article 1 - Proposing
https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-death-penalty-appropriate
Article 2 - Opposing https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2024/01/death-penalty-incompatible-right-life
Arguments of Text 1 - Proposing:
● The supreme court approves of the concept of a death penalty
- The death penalty acts as an ultimate punishment for the most unacceptable crimes
- There are supporting and opposing views to the acceptability of the death penalty (there
are differing views in the case of multiple countries as well)
- Specific Amendments accept the death penalty
- The death penalty was reinstated in 1976
- The subjection of death should be extremely fair: possible victims should have lawyers to
represent them throughout the process and racism should not play any role in the
decision.
● Three objectives of the death penalty: general deterrence, specific deterrence and retribution.
- General deterrence: General deterrence arrives in the form of a message which is sent to
the people who may be contemplating the possible commitment of a heinous crime, by
warning them that the punishment could be death.
- Specific deterrence: This is specific to the criminal. It refers to the fact that should the
person be subjected to death, they won’t be able to harm others.
- Retribution: Essentially, this is ‘an expression of society’s right to make a moral
judgement by imposing a punishment on a wrongdoer’ which is in accordance with the
crime committed.
● Mistakes happen, but that is no reason to shut down the death penalty.
- There have been multiple false convictions, which have been proven by projects such as
the Innocence Project
- The thought of mistakes should not differ the thought of the death penalty
- In the present world, there are multiple systems that the decision will be passed through
before a final decision would be attained.
Arguments of Text 2 - Opposing:
● The death penalty opposes ‘human dignity, the right to life and the right to live free from torture’
- When possible mistakes happen, and the falsely accused victims are subjected to death, it
is unthinkable.
- No institution or system is perfect, and mistakes always occur, which means multiple
innocents are murdered.
- The UN Human Rights opposes the death penalty
- Evidence suggests that the death penalty has almost no effect on crime (studies are
referenced and the conclusion remains that after the abolishment of the death penalty,
nations saw their murder rates continue at the same rate, or even decline)
- The death penalty has also been used in a discriminatory manner, when people are
discriminated against due to specific reasons (such as ethnicity, religion, background,
gender identity, etc.)
- Major officials noted that they observed that severe pain is inflicted upon a person from
the moment of sentence to their execution
● The article stresses upon the fact that if universal, immediate abolition was declined, it was urged
that nations should place a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.
● Progress in abolition: The number of abolitions of the death penalty in countries has risen from 8
to 170
RESPONSE:
Both articles were written clearly and had completely opposing views.
The supporting article, stressed upon the fact that the Supreme Court itself approves of the concept of a
death penalty. The death penalty could be thought of as an ultimate punishment, for the most heinous
crimes committed. The death penalty also serves multiple purposes: warning the public of committing
such unthinkable crimes, preventing further harm by the hand of the criminal and allowing society to
make a collective, moral decision.
The article acknowledged the fact that mistakes happen, however, emphasised that our world is evolving
faster than ever before, and our systems grow with us, which decreases false convictions majorly.
The opposing article began with the fact that the death penalty opposes human honor, and the right to life.
When mistakes happen with the death penalty, there is no solution.
The article then provided evidence to back up the fact that the death penalty has a minor effect on society,
by explaining that murder rates remained the same, or even decreased in some cases.
The use of the death penalty in discriminatory and derogatory manners was mentioned as well,
highlighting the need for equality and justice.
The article recognized the fact that from the moment a person is sentenced, to the moment they are
executed, severe pain is inflicted upon them - even just mentally.
While progress in abolition has increased incredibly, the article urges nations to at least place a
moratorium on the penalty, if not abolish it.
Both articles used impeccable literary devices and language.
In the first article; the language used was vivid and descriptive. It demanded attention to the need for a
penalty for the most unfathomable actions and crimes. The language used was persuasive, factual, and
well thought out. The punctuation used was impactful. Each punctuation mark helped emphasise specific
parts of a phrase, conveying the message to the reader efficiently. The grammar choices were extremely
accurate. The use of different types of sentence structures, adjectives, etc. helped stress upon how
important awareness, action and justice is.
In the second article; the language used in this article was emotional and passionate. The severity of the
language accentuated the need for the abolition of the death penalty, painting a visual image of the
dangerous consequences of the penalty. The punctuation used in this was highly persuasive. It structured
statistics and quotes in a convincing format. The grammar choices in this article are extremely clever. The
various types of sentences, nouns, and adverbs used depict the cruelty of the death penalty.
Discursive response:
The death penalty. One of the most controversial methods of punishment, across the globe. The death
penalty first began around the 18th century, and is prevalent in multiple countries around the world, even
in the 21st century.
The death penalty can act as an ultimate punishment for the most unfathomable crimes. In fact, this
penalty is extremely impactful, as it: sends a message to the public, prevents the criminal from continuing
harm, and allows society to make a moral decision. In accordance with the death penalty, there are
multiple rules and regulations in place to assure the criminal’s conviction is valid.
However, in the instance that a mistake is made, it is impossible to rectify - in the case of a death penalty.
Evidence also suggests that the death penalty has very little effect on crime rates - nations saw their
murder rates continue at the same rate, or even decline after the abolition of the death penalty. Sadly, in
the past, the death penalty has been used in a discriminatory and even derogatory manner, when people
are discriminated against due to their background, ethnicity, religion, etc.
I strongly believe that the death penalty should be abolished. Studies show that in every 8 people
executed, at least one person has been wrongfully convicted. The possibility of executing an individual,
simply because of a mistake, robbing them of the ability to continue the rest of their life, is unfathomable.
And while there may be certain accurate messages sent efficiently, I think that there is little reward to
reap, considering the minor effect of the penalty.
The consequences of the death penalty far outweigh the benefits, and I firmly believe that the death
penalty should be abolished in every single country and nation, to prevent further discrimination and
irreversible damage to our global community.
