Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

Andromeda M.

Neilson
Professor Drexler
Phil. 1250

Signature Assignment

Analytical Assumption:
I always agreed on capital punishment. An Eye for an Eye seems to be a logical
standard to go by. But, there are others that believe the system is starting to wither away as cost
is said to increase. But, has the death penalty become too costly for the U.S? Meg Penrose writes
in the Deseret News saying YES: SIMPLY PUT, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT NO LONGER
MAKES CENTS. And, continues to argue about the tremendous cost we pay for each inmate.
She explains that conservatives are tend to see that cost for inmates on death row are more
expensive than people on life sentence. If we are trying to watch our budgets then having capital
punishment is not the answer. It already costs money for people to go through trail, and there is
no way to lessen a constitutional right. She then brings up two studies made in Idaho and
Maryland. The 2014 cost for an execution was over fifty thousand per person in Idaho. And, a
study in 2008 stated that the cost of eligible or secured death penalty prosecution alone are way
too high. Cost for individuals eligible were, $1.8 million per individual while secured cost 3
million per individual. Then she remarks that are we benefiting by funding capital punishment
when we can be using that to better our schools. Or, better yet, use that money for hiring more
officers. Then she brings up a question, Would we rather have one individual executed or more
teachers and police officers? she determines that no matter what we do to lower the cost; it will
always be expensive and steep decline on our federal budget.

Reponse with Fallacies

On Nov. 5 2005, Kenneth Eugene Barreth was charged with 3 criminal counts after a
drug bust on his property. One of the counts was the murder of a police officer named Eales.
Officer Eales was just doing his job, and if Mr Barreth was have just submitted to polices
regulations then this would have never happened. Obviously, Barreth knew what he was doing
when he pulled the trigger; he intentionally attacked the police officers in the first place. So, does
Barreth deserve fair treatment since he murdered a police officer? The victims family would
think so, would you go against the familys justification? Some crimes are just too harsh to let
off so easily. There are too many people that are convicts on the loose. Crime rates increase
because we dont cut the deadline sooner for a sentence to be decided. I understand that it isnt
constructional to not have a fair trial, but was the murder Barreth committed morally pursued?
This horrific criminal shot this innocent officer who loved his community. Letting criminals like
Barreth live would be disrespectful towards his family and community; all because we worried
too much about the cost and benefits of capital punishment. Adolf Hitler killed many people, and
was a hazard to the world. And, we all know that hazards are dangerous to people and should be
rid of. Killers are extreme harzards in our world and Hilter killed; which makes him a killer. So,
wouldnt it be the right thing to do to get rid of killers by the death penalty? I mean killing is bad.
And, he is a bad person so we have to continue the death penalty if we dont want people like
him in the world. What if a murder killed you child or spouse? To see them on the floor dead
because some insane person decides to kill them for no real good reason. Of course, you would
avenge the person(s) you love right? Wouldnt the death penalty be the best decision a jury can
make? Killers are just criminals that can never be good and cant rational make the right
decision. I wouldnt want to be around an irrational bad person with bad intentions, and I believe
everyone can agree with me on this. I is best if we leave the costs alone and see the value of lives
we save instead.

Responding for real

Meg Penrose offers a good argument on capital punishment, there are many thing to
consider will making the decision when it comes to the cost on an individual inmate. And, yes I
believe that the expenses can help out education and the police more if we didnt waste our time
having capital punishment. But, can we say that we dont need it? Would this be a factor to
overpopulation in prisons? This would add more costs for the public to deal with then to
eliminate someone in reasonable terms. In New York the average cost of an inmate is $60,000
per inmate. The Vera Institute of Justice made a study back in 2012 that shows prison cost in
2010 in 40 states was $39 billion dollars! Making our nations annual cost for each inmate
average amount $31,286 each! (Santora) Thats a very high yearly cost to leave convicts
aliveeven ones who commited felonies like murder. David B. Muhlhausen argues, Most
Americans recognized this principle as just. Gallup polls show continuing public support for the
death penalty. (Muhlhausen) The public wants to feel a sense of justification when a dilemma
like murder occurs. And, since theres support, I believe that these enthusiasts are willing to pay
for the cost of their security. And, could we put a cost to the victims lives just to save some
money? Is money more valuable than life? I understand that this takes the disagreement to a
personal level, but would Meg Penrose have a different answer if one of her close family
members was murdered? Possibly. And, since there is a possibility, then Americans that agree to
capital punishment also understand the circumstances that comes with it: protection and a sense
of relief that justice has been served.

Reflection on own argument


The fact that Im not a professional at law make me venerable already. I had to make an
argument against a professor of law with a masters from Notre Dame. I brought up the
possibility of overpopulation in prisons. Well, I felt that was a weak premise because theres
already an issue to overpopulationthe death penalty cost. But, I backed it up with a strong sub
premises about the cost of each inmate we already pay. Then, again maybe this would also show
another issue about our given constitutional right. In this case, Meg already states that it
wouldnt happen since its our constitutional right. I feel like even though Im supposed to
response for real I still committed fallacies like Appeal to Pity. At the end of the argument I
bring up the personal feeling of victims. And, I even question Megs argument with the
possibility of her inexperience with someone murdered in her family. I believe it is a good
argument, but there are some reasons that could have been better.

Identification/Explanations of fallacies

1. Red Harring- Attempting to persuade the audience with irrelevant reasons for an
argument. I use the case of Kenneth Barreth as a reason that has nothing to do with the
cost and just to stir up the audience.
2. Appeal to Pity- Playing with the audiences feeling in order to prove a point. I take
sweetly about the police officer that passed away and use the words victim and
family to draw the audiences heart to get involved.
3. Ad Hominem-Psychological-Attempts to discredit an argument by questioning the mind
of the person-I mention in the essay that the Barreth isnt rational to make right decisions
because he is a criminal.
4. Appeal to Fear- persuading by describing the possibilities of harm instead of actual
reasons. I mentioned that the criminal was horrific and shot an innocent police officer in
the case of Mr. Kenneth Barreth.
5. Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon) when something is agreed on by many and have the
assumption that you would agree too. I mention that everyone would agree with me about
having security from irrational criminals.
6. Complex Questions- Questions that provoke uneasiness and are used instead of a reason.
I question the feeling and experiences personally on Meg about Murder and the death
penalty. I also question about getting rid of killers is the right thing to do I basically
question her moral standards for herself and what she would truly feel. And, if she were
to disagree to any answer it would probably make her look bad.
7. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc- one of many- when B can be one of many factors of A. I
argue that crime rates increase and a lot of people are on the loose because we dont
speed up trial sentences.

Work Cited
1. Penrose, Meg. Has death penalty become too costly in U.S.?. Deseret News 19 Oct.
2014: G7. Print. 19 Oct. 2014.
2. Muhlhausen, David B. Has death penalty become too costly in U.S.?. Deseret News. 19
Oct. 2014: G7. Print. 19 Oct. 2014.
3. Santora, Mark. Annual Cost Per Inmate is $168,000, Study Finds The New York Times
[New York City] 23 Aug. 2013: A16. Nytimes.com. Web. 19 Oct. 2014.

Вам также может понравиться