2012년 5월 29일 화요일

something about my debate topic


           Death penalty is really really and really sensitive issue, so it is very hard to give an opinion about this issue. But I believe that the death penalty should be preserved and performed.
           The basic reason of making penalties and jails is to protect civilians from “harms.” The harms mean the activities and behaviors that are banned by laws, because these behaviors might give physical or psychological damage to civilians. For example, murdering someone is outlawed because this behavior gives physical and psychological damage to other people. I believe that the best and efficient way to eliminate harms is the “death penalty.” But death penalty should be held for severe crimes like murder, not for all outlawed activities. This is because not all crimes give same damage to the people; for example, murdering a person gives really harsh damage to the person who are murdered and people who are closely related with the murdered man, but stealing does not gives severe damage as murdering to the people. I am stating that “death penalty” should be used but to the most severe crimes.
           The problem related with money is another reason that I think the government should perform the “death penalty.” Suppose that one person is sentenced life imprisonment. The civilians should pay tax to feed the criminal and to provide necessaries for the criminal until he or she dies. This is waste of the tax that people paid. But if there is a death penalty and the government uses this penalty, we could reduce the money that is spent on the criminals. Then the government can use the extra tax on the other policies like the policy to reduce crimes.
           Finally the fear of death can reduce the crime rates. When the government used death penalty, the crime rates fell. This is because the crimes could lead death to the criminals.
           Like this the death penalty has lots of advantages, although it might be opposed because of inhumanity.

댓글 1개:

  1. Interesting choice of essay, and I hope you really do READ about it as much as possible before you write. The argument about tax dollars being wasted on inmates is valid - when it comes to petty crimes and petty criminals - but murder convicts within prison are a very small minority. We don't save money by using the death penalty, and in many cases the inmate is in prison for a long long time before it happens. So, I'd say this argument needs work if you were to use it.

    As well, we naturally assume the death penalty only applies to murder. In some nations, however, you can be put to death for other crimes, so you should be careful how you discuss this point. It might be potentially weak. Are we focusing on one nation in particular or the entire world? If possible, limit your paper so it has a narrower focus that is easier to argue. I think you'll find reading inspires better arguments than what you have above.

    답글삭제