Yeah. This is okay.
In the United States of America, the death penalty is accepted by most state using lethal injection. Some people are strongly against it. They think that lethal injection could be more harmful than it seems to be (weekly reader). The death penalty shouldn’t be allowed because the inmates may suffer a long painful death, they may be too young, and the people who are on death row may not actually be the killers they were arrested for.
The death penalty should be abolished because inmates may suffer a long painful death if the anesthesia wears off or the inmates might wake up before the process is over. The steps of lethal injection are as followed: the inmate gets put onto a chair here they are strapped in. Next a needle injects the inmate with special drugs so the process can start. The first drug, which is called sodium thiopental, is the anesthesia drug that makes the inmate unconscious. This is where the first problem can occur. The inmate may wake up while the second and third drugs are at work, so the inmate will suffer a long painful death. The second drug is called pancuronium bromide, which paralyzes the muscles. The last drug, potassium chloride, is the one that stops the inmate’s heart. The last two drugs can be very uncomfortable, even painful for the inmate to undergo. Most people who have suffered a loss at the hands of someone on death row want that inmate to suffer. While most people who have suffered a loss want the inmate who is on death row to suffer, it is important to not let your emotions get in the way of how humane you may be. In most opinions, killing someone is wrong so what is the difference because either way, someone takes someone else’s life.
The people who are about to receive the death penalty that their state allows, may be very young, possibly 17 or younger. The inmates who are convicted of murder may be “Too Young to die?” as Teen Newsweek put it. They state in their article that 17 year old Lee Boyd Malvo went on a killing spree in Washington D.C. in October of 2002. The jury of the court room suggested the death sentence. Luckily, that sentence wasn’t put into action, but what if it did? In the U.S.A. a person under the age of 18 isn’t counted as an adult. They cannot vote, serve in the military, or marry without parent permission. Since they are still juvenile and cannot make their own legal decisions, 69 % of Americans oppose the idea of the death penalty for people under 18 (in a 2002 Gallup Poll). Even if they are 17 or younger, they still have committed a crime and who knows if they will do it again. That’s why some people still think that the death penalty should be used even with juvenile delinquents. Even so, people who are younger have more to live for and they are the next generation of people to run the U.S.A.
The citizens who are on death row may not be the actual murderers. They could be innocent, while the actual murderer is killing other innocent people. Since 1976, at least 124 people have been proven innocent, while on death row. This is due to human error. The people who are on death row don’t deserve to die a possibly painful death if they aren’t guilty of the crime. If they are the convicted murderers, than we can save lives by not letting them out of jail. We don’t know if they will do it again and if it seems like they will, then not letting them out of jail could help people live longer.
In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished because the inmates may suffer a long painful death, they may be too young, and the people who are on death row may not actually be the killers they were arrested for. In my opinion, and many others, no one deserves to die.
Work Cited:
"Too Young to Die?." Teen Newsweek. Dec. 15 2003: 7+. SIRS Discoverer. Web. 21 Feb. 2014.
"Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?." New York Times Upfront (Vol. 140, No. 7). Dec. 10 2007: 28. SIRS Discoverer. Web. 21 Feb. 2014.
N/A “Cruel & Unusual?” Current Events. 22 Oct. 2007. 4+. Print.
Hey there!
This is quite a controversial topic but it looks like you have done your research and you presented some good points. In Britain we don't have the death penalty so forgive me if I get any information wrong. Your points if negated by a counter argument would hold up and disprove their reasons. So overall very well done essay.
In my opinion the best two points were:
at least 124 people have been proven innocent, while on death row.
it is important to not let your emotions get in the way of how humane you may be.
Hi there BunnyBot! Niteowl here to drop some Frozen Fahrvergnugen on you from the Majestic Icicles this fine Review Day.
Now, you raise some very good points about the death penalty. I think your strongest point is the last one about innocent people being convicted and put to death. The rise of DNA has led to a lot of old convictions based on witness accounts being overturned, but that doesn't always happen in time.
While most people who have suffered a loss want the inmate who is on death row to suffer, it is important to not let your emotions get in the way of how humane you may be.
They state in their article that 17 year old Lee Boyd Malvo went on a killing spree in Washington D.C. in October of 2002. The jury of the court room suggested the death sentence. Luckily, that sentence wasn’t put into action, but what if it did?
Hi, Weather here to review.
This is an interesting but controversial topic, which is good. I think this topic should definitely be addressed more often than it is. You've structured it well in terms of grammar and punctuation its also cohesive. I think the main improvement to be made here is content.
I feel like you've only focused on one aspect throughout your whole essay, it's better to look at a range of aspects in this because it was very bias from what I could see. Every fair and good essay has two different sides which are equally evaluated and have a range of viewpoints.
You focused mainly on the fact it should be abolished rather than why some may argue it should be kept. It would really strengthen your essay and conclusion if you said both sides but argued strongly on your opinion in the concluding paragraph so the reader can see how they outweigh each other and is convinced by you.
"In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished because the inmates may suffer a long painful death, they may be too young, and the people who are on death row may not actually be the killers they were arrested for. In my opinion, and many others, no one deserves to die."
Here some may argue with age, does it really matter? If a serious crime worthy of death has been committed should they be excused for simply being "too young to die" ? Just an observation.
Your main basis seemed to be on the long and painful death. The death penalty has other issues aside from that. The age of the people on death row was another point to make which was good and also the aspect of human error of convicting the innocent were good points to make. The point of human error could use a bit more statistics to make your argument a bit stronger, I know you've already used one e.g.
The citizens who are on death row may not be the actual murderers. They could be innocent, while the actual murderer is killing other innocent people. "Since 1976, at least 124 people have been proven innocent, while on death row." This is due to human error.
Perhaps get more figures from even further back in time, the beginning of the death penalty up till now. Also if there has been an increase in percentage recently.
I think you could have brought up the aspect, (without necessarily bringing up religion if you don't want to) of humans having the right to take someone else's life? Too much power that concept of power should be highlighted. Elaborating on the ethical issues that arises from the death penalty also. How the person may not have a second chance to change. Killing people to prevent people from killing people may not make sense in that view.
An interesting thing is that in Britain there is no death penalty and there is less crime there than in America, despite America having the death penalty, which is meant to act as a deterrent from committing serious crimes. So the death penalty may not be all that effective.
The other side of this argument to consider is why people may be for the death penalty. It keeps people protected and safe from danger, it can be act as a deterrent from crime, if successful. It may be seen as justice served. It could be seen as not taking the easy way out.
Overall an interesting topic well done on the concept of it, just broaden your mind even more to get the best out of your essay. Hope this was helpful.
--Weather
Yes I agree that the death penalty should be abolished. The people we put into government are still people. Do they have a right to kill another? Personally I am not religious but one of the commandment is 'Thou shall not kill' and I think it's right. As equals we have no right to take another life. Even some murder victims' families have been known disagree with the death sentence because they either disagree with it morally or believe death is an easy escape. Can someone really be given the power of life and death just because they went to law school?
120,199 Literary Works • 649,044 Reviews
Points: 184
Reviews: 93
Donate