Argument Essay: Abolish The Death Penalty

In the debate with the motion “Abolish the Death Penalty”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that the death penalty is an insecure and hurtful policy that does not help advance public safety. Diann claims that the death penalty is not giving the public any safety nor does it decrease violence. Arguing that it is a waste of taxpayer money that could be used to improve law enforcement training. She later argues that the death penalty is an outdated system that is bias towards race and color, claiming that black men are less likely to be sentenced to death even though they are most likely to be victims of homicide. Diann ends her argument with a humanitarian statement that we as humans have the ability to change our way of life and we should not have to take …show more content…
She never actually states the source of her statistics dealing with the bias and racism in the death penalty. Many of her arguments she brought up would change the debate from being a “public policy” debate and turning it into a race issue. I feel that she lost some of the audience by making the argument into a race issue because it made them think of the statistics she provided to be false. However, her concluding statement was good because it made it a moral issue and caused the audience to rethink of how they saw the issue of the death penalty. Dianna had many good points and had strong evidence that helped her prove her statements. But on the other hand, a lot of her evidence was very heavy to only be stated without a reliable source to back it up. Some of her examples and statistics had invalid correlation with the death penalty. I believe that if she had stated her sources and if they were reliable her argument would be respected more and not be ignored by the other side. Until we have proof from a reliable source that her evidence is true, we can not agree with her position in abolishing the death