Death Penalty

By Thaddeus Giberson

Topic Overview

For my controversial topic I choose the death penalty. The death penalty mainly has two sides to its argument, mainly whether the death penalty should be legalized or banned. The main argument against the death penalty is that it is very expensive and that sometimes innocent people are executed. The main argument for the death penalty is that the threat of death is a deterrent to crime. The side I will be arguing in my essay is a kind of middle ground that calls for not a complete ban or legalization but for a reform of the execution system.


Picture two people sitting on death row, waiting for death to come and claim them from the prison they’ve spent twenty miserable years of their life in. Both of them are convicted murderers. One of them is innocent and could have been exonerated by a simple DNA test that the government felt was unnecessary. The other committed the crime, but the court failed to recognized that it was completely accidental. The death penalty is used too frequently, and the government should evaluate inmates before they go on death row to see whether or not they could pose a threat to society if they escaped and whether there is irrefutable evidence for their crime.

People that commit a murder by accident or in a fit of rage should not be executed for the crime when their return to society would not endanger those around them. Sometimes accidents happen, and in some extreme accidents people die. In a courtroom, sometimes the fact that it was accidental just flies right by. Do they deserve to die for something they weren't trying to do. People argue that all murderers deserve to die, but this eye for an eye mentality will make the world blind, or in this case dead. The raw purpose of the death penalty is to completely remove the chance of someone who could be a danger to society if they escaped from escaping. If someone who commits a murder because of a lifetime culmination of bad treatment from someone and then one day just snaps and kills them, then if they stayed out in society would they really kill anyone else. No one else has been wronging them for years and years. I think instead of executing every murderer, the state should spend their money better suited for helping rehabilitate people.

Accidents happen sometimes, even by the state, before an execution happens the state should be required to have found irrefutable evidence proving that the guilty party is in fact guilty. Studies show that approximately 4.1% of people executed in the United States each year are innocent. This may not seem like much, but with the average 36 execution each year almost 2 innocent people are being killed each year. Others may say that the deterrent of crime by the death penalty saves 10 lives for every 2 it takes, but in our own Declaration of Independence it states that "all men are created equal with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men," and if our government cannot secure the basic right of life to its law abiding citizens then is it doing what it needs to be doing? If the government would make extensive DNA tests required before any execution we could reduce the number of innocents that are being killed to 0.

Before inmates are executed, the state should confirm their guiltiness with conclusive data, and their threat to society should be evaluated to see whether or not they are deserving of the death penalty. If these changes were made we could cut back on innocents being executed and help more convicted murderers be rehabilitated and rejoin society as law abiding citizens.

Social Media

I don't have social media at all.

But #ReformCapitolPunishment


Fallacies Pt. 1

In one of my articles the writer quotes the Bible as evidence. I'm not sure what fallacy this would be but he is taking a religious text, and because religion isn't scientifically proven or whatever, then it is like taking a testimony from a witness with bad eyes. The witness could be right or could be wrong. The point is that if the government was full of Jewish people then would his argument influence any of the Senators to vote for his side. I guess this is ethos, by using biblical references he gains credibility with Christians while losing credibility with people of other faiths.
Big image

Fallacies Pt. 2

This meme clearly shows a straw man fallacy, because the argument that all murderers should be executed is easily knocked over, and truthfully, only Donald Trump would think something as stupid as that.
Big image

Fallacies Pt. 3

The meme above shows Gandalf trying to wrap his head around a slippery slope mixed with a false cause. The idea presented is that since the death penalty was legalized crime has picked up because of the death penalty. And because crime is picking up more innocent people are being killed. Therefore, because the death penalty was legalized, more innocent people are being killed. This is of course false.