Final piece

2

Touchstone 3.2: Draft an Argumentative Research Comment by Chris: Hi, Demetrius. I’m Chris, and I’m your Sophia reader.

Demetrius

English 2

10/31/2021

The argument about Capital Punishment in Deterring Homicide Crimes

Murder and adultery were crimes punishable by death as far back as the biblical era. The death penalty has undergone significant changes throughout time, including where it is applied and how it is determined whether it is a possibility for specific crimes. In the United States, the death penalty has a long and illustrious history. Capital punishment (death penalty) is used in certain countries and jurisdictions to discourage homicide (Johnson, 2019). Death penalty supporters claim that it deters homicide by making people afraid of being executed if they commit a horrific crime. However, because of the moral and theological concerns surrounding the death sentence, this assertion has been met with resistance (Rubin, 2017). Nonetheless, defenders of death punishment argue that it is inhumane and that alternative methods of punishing murder criminals and doing justice to victims and their families may be implemented. For example, the homicide offender may be sentenced to life in prison, which is both compassionate and cost-effective. Comment by Chris: The contents of both the first graphs are sound and correct. On revision, please work on the thesis as follows—see if you can move it up higher than the end of graph two. Next, make the phrasing a should/b/c statement. The death penalty should not continue b/c (reasons 1, 2, 3). Or some such.

Furthermore, death punishment is a government-funded program with financial consequences. Despite claims by proponents of capital punishment that it saves federal funds, the contemporary death sentence has proven to be extremely costly (Rubin, 2017). Specifically, there have been a few study findings showing that the death sentence has become more costly as compared to the projected benefits of preventing heinous murders. The expense of the death penalty is steadily rising. As a result, citizens in the United States pay a high price for the death sentence, leading to the question of whether capital punishment is justified. Along these lines, it's worth noting that the government is reassessing the cost-effectiveness of death punishment in deterring homicide (Bessler, 2016). When compared to life imprisonment, capital punishment is inefficient at preventing homicide. Comment by Chris: Thesis needs tweaking and needs to be higher.

The death penalty in the United States

The government initiative to abolish capital punishment has related costs and benefits, despite the belief among many individuals that it is a moral issue (Bessler, 2016). Because of the lower cost of imprisonment, healthcare, and other related expenses, some people think the death penalty saves the government money (DPIC, 2017). In any event, the advanced use of death punishment in a few states in the United States has proven to be costly, with a variety of expenses involved. Moreover, study findings show that Executions are declining in the United States, indicating that state executions are on the decline. The reason for this is that government spend a lot of money to run death penalty programs than a system that utilizes sentences without the possibility of further appeal as an optional kind of punishment (DPIC, 2017). For example, 270 crimes were punished by capital penalties, or crimes punishable by death, in England throughout the 1800s (Bessler, 2016). The U.S was the last Western democracy to retain the death penalty. Nevada was the district of the first gas chamber execution in 1924. The last public execution took place in Kentucky in 1936. Over 20,000 individuals saw the public execution, which was open to the public. Several states chose to abolish death punishment in the 1950s. Comment by Chris: This graph has some proofing/caps errors. Correct sentence with “…than a “ as it’s missing a word.

A close analysis of the data indicates that the reduction in death sentencing will continue. In the United States, the number of executions has decreased by 8.4, 9.1, and 3.6 per cent during the previous three, five, and ten years, respectively (DPIC, 2017). The pattern is seen in Fig 1 below. Comment by Chris: The data are not written in a way that ties it to the thesis? It’s hanging out there without any statement for or against? Try to fix that.

Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 2017 Comment by Chris: Chart is acceptable b/c it does not affect page count requirement.

The Theory of Deterrence

Essentially, deterrence is when people that might intend to commit a crime refrain from doing so because of the threat of punishment. Deterrence could be at an individual or general level (Waldo & Myers, 2019). The effect of individual deterrence is on the individual who accepts capital punishment, whereas general deterrence is on people who abstain from committing crimes. As far as deterrence is concerned, only general deterrence is considered (Bessler, 2016).

Another important distinction, according to Johnson (2019), is the difference between outright and marginal deterrence. The impacts of one degree or kind of punishment with the impact of not forcing the penalty are referred to as outright deterrence. The influence of one structure or degree of discipline on another is referred to as marginal deterrence. The death sentence, in particular, is concerned about its minimal deterrent effect. Compared to an optional kind of punishment, such as life imprisonment, the question here is whether the death sentence effectively deterred crimes. Comment by Chris: This is where real connections to the thesis reside … several good claims of support here.

The negative relationship between the death penalty and deterrence of homicide crime rate murder cases persists, according to Waldo & Myers (2019), even though the odds of apprehending offenders and prosecuting them with capital punishment are 100 per cent. Moreover, the death sentence does not discourage murder offences in any way. Aside from being extremely costly, the death penalty's complex protocols are unreliable as well.

Furthermore, the United States' legal system does not provide equitable justice for crimes. Only those who commit heinous crimes like terror attacks and widespread arson are summarily executed (Bessler, 2016). The legal system should update the laws to ensure that all criminals face the same level of punishment.

Lastly, it is expensive to retain the death sentence when innocent people are accused of crimes they did not commit. Sentences to death for innocent people are equivalent to endorsing murder for those who have no reason to deserve such a heinous penalty (Waldo & Myers, 2019).

Alternatives to capital punishment

Life Imprisonment - Most people prefer this over the death penalty, as it is less expensive. Instead of facing the death sentence, the prisoner must serve the remainder of their life in prison (Johnson, 2019). Even though the defendant is imprisoned, they may be released under certain situations. However, one downside of life incarceration is that the prisoner is simply incarcerated and obliged to observe federal correctional regulations, not rehabilitated to change their conduct (Johnson (2019).

Life Imprisonment Without the Possibility of Parole (LWOP) - In this form of life imprisonment, the offenders are locked up for the remainder of their lives with no chance of parole (Waldo & Myers, 2019). It has severe repercussions and aids in the prevention of homicide. LWOP is a harsh sentence that keeps criminals in jail until they die, despite being less expensive than the death penalty. LWOP also jeopardizes human dignity and the right to a natural existence for the offender (Bessler, 2016). Comment by Chris: I think too often you lack transitions that would help flow. “A real downside to to LWOP, however, is it jeopardizes…” would flow better for example.

Long and Determinate - Sentences in prison, in this case, the criminal is convicted to a l long period of incarceration, after which they are released. It has a high retaliatory effect in the concept that offenders change their behaviour when they know they will reclaim their freedom and join the business world in the long run (Rubin, 2017). This type of incarceration is preferable to LWOP and life sentences. The downside of this type of punishment is that criminals may claim to have reformed their moral behavior to be freed from jail, only to return to their illegal activities (Waldo & Myers, 2019). Comment by Chris: I retaliatory the right word?

Counter Perspective

Death penalty supporters argue that it is beneficial in preventing murder offences. They believe that capital punishment serves as a deterrent in a variety of ways. Deterrence, according to Rubin (2017), works in the following ways:

In the public view, capital punishment is a wellspring of ethics - capital punishment shows the degree of the displeasure of society with crime through its strict application. As a result of the public's displeasure with violations, the death penalty is regarded as upholding moral practices and mentalities.

Simple deterrence - In its most basic form, the death penalty aims to 'alter the hearts' of those who would commit crimes. Apparently, people experience 'difference in the heart' because they contrast the 'advantages' and 'pleasures' of committing crimes with the risk that they will suffer the death penalty. The death penalty's power for deterrence is shaped by this capability.

Discipline fosters respect for the law - despite fostering a culture of respect for law as a legal system, capital punishment has also been used as a means of curbing impunity. As a result, the rate of crimes has declined significantly.  

Punishment is a technique of reasoning for achieving congruency in the public sphere - the existence of the threat of discipline allows the general public to build similarities. This becomes more feasible with time, especially if a person is prone to peer influence.

Consequently, because deterrence is a morally defective notion, the argument for capital punishment does not hold. Even if it were effective in preventing homicides, it is inexcusable that one person should be held responsible for future offences. In rare instances, the death sentence has been used to punish innocent citizens (Johnson, 2019). Comment by Chris: The project in Chicago would laugh at Johnson for asserting “in rare instances.” Actually, the death of the innocent de-emphasized here is the MAIN reason death opponents fight. You should emphasize it more.

Conclusion

It is self-evident that, regardless of their misdeeds, those sentenced to death are robbed of their right to life. As a result, the death penalty is viewed as inhumane. Furthermore, the procedure and upkeep of the death sentence are both costly. Even when the probability of locating the offenders and putting them to death is certain, murder crimes continue to occur. In this way, capital punishment does not act as a deterrent to homicide. Life imprisonment without the possibility of release and long and determinate jail terms have all been proposed as alternatives to death punishment. As alternatives to the death penalty, these do not deprive prisoners of their right to life and are less expensive. In this way, it appears that the death penalty costs taxpayers money and does not prevent homicide. Comment by Chris: Fair closer wrapping up point. Please move really good reference page to separate page.

References

Bessler, J. D. (2016). The American Enlightenment: Eliminating Capital Punishment in the United States. Capital punishment: A hazard to a sustainable criminal justice system, 96-97.

Death Penalty Information Center. (2017). DPIC analysis: Execution trends continue to decline in 2017. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/dpic-analysis-execution-trends-continue-to-decline-in-2017.

Johnson, B. (2019). Do Criminal Laws Deter Crime? Deterrence Theory in Criminal Justice Policy: A Primer. MN House Research.

Rubin, S. (2017). The Supreme Court, cruel and unusual punishment, and the death penalty. Capital Punishment, 245–261. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315081809-22

Waldo, G. P., & Myers, W. (2019). Criminological research and the death penalty: have research by criminologists impacted capital punishment practices? American journal of criminal justice, 44(4), 536-580.

Touchstone 3.2 Rubric and Feedback
Rubric Category	Feedback	Score (acceptable, needs improvement etc.)
Argument Development and Support	The argument is not fully developed; while it is supported by some relevant details, including rhetorical appeals and source material, some aspects of the argument are neglected.	37/40 Proficient
Research	Primarily cites outside sources appropriately; incorporates credible sources effectively through direct quotation, paraphrase, or summary.	29/30 Advanced
Organization	Includes all of the required components of an argumentative research paper, including an introduction with background information, an argumentative thesis, an adequate number of body paragraphs with topic sentences, a body paragraph addressing counterargument(s), and a conclusion with a concluding statement.	14/15 Proficient
Style	Demonstrates effective word choices, primarily avoids redundancy and imprecise language, and uses a variety of sentence structures.	4/5 Proficient
Conventions	There are some significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.	3/5 Acceptable
Reflection	Section not present.	0/5 Nonperformance
Overall Score and Feedback: 87/100 This would score the A but for the missing reflection. Make that your first revision priority. Then, follow my comments about thesis claim. After, consider linking evidence more explicitly to that claim more often than you do here. Next, add Grammarly to catch what are too many sentence structure errors. Spell check more aggressively, as well. Move the reference page. Finally, and critically investigate whether you should really say that so few are put to death who are innocent. Turns out we kill a lot of innocents. This is really solid work and should score very well on revision. Looking forward to reading you. Chris