In any public speaking situation, you will likely encounter people who disagree with you, whether you're trying to inform them about a general topic or persuade them to think, believe, or do something. Some of the counterarguments, critiques, and questions they offer may be excellent ones; others may reflect ignorance about the topic or the audience's distrust of you, the speaker. This week, your discussion is about how you deal with counterarguments and detractors in a real-life speech.
In your initial post, identify three legitimate counter arguments, critiques, or questions that an audience might pose in opposition to the speech you submitted last week. Briefly explain how you might respond to each one in your speech.
After your initial …show more content…
After hearing my speech, the audience may present counterarguments such as instead of the death penalty, the criminals being administered into rehabilitation programs so they can be implemented back into society and be functioning and productive members of society. My argument is one that I addressed in the last speech: When criminals are released from prison, 15% of felons who have raped, murdered, or committed aggravated assault will commit the crime again. An example is Robert Lee Massie. He was sent to prison for killing Mildred Weiss and her husband during a robbery. His original sentence was the death penalty, but California retracted this form of punishment, so he instead only served a few years and was released for good behavior. After a year of being out, he struck again and killed liquor store owner Boris Naumoff during a robbery. Another counterargument the audience might have is that people shouldn’t be able to play God. People shouldn’t be able to decide whether someone should die for their actions. In my opinion, this statement is true. People should not be able to judge the fate of someone else. It is not their right. I think that criminals involve people when they plan on killing or hurting more people. Then for the good of the people, a criminal should be faced with the death penalty. Another counterargument the audience may have
In your initial post, identify three legitimate counter arguments, critiques, or questions that an audience might pose in opposition to the speech you submitted last week. Briefly explain how you might respond to each one in your speech.
After your initial …show more content…
After hearing my speech, the audience may present counterarguments such as instead of the death penalty, the criminals being administered into rehabilitation programs so they can be implemented back into society and be functioning and productive members of society. My argument is one that I addressed in the last speech: When criminals are released from prison, 15% of felons who have raped, murdered, or committed aggravated assault will commit the crime again. An example is Robert Lee Massie. He was sent to prison for killing Mildred Weiss and her husband during a robbery. His original sentence was the death penalty, but California retracted this form of punishment, so he instead only served a few years and was released for good behavior. After a year of being out, he struck again and killed liquor store owner Boris Naumoff during a robbery. Another counterargument the audience might have is that people shouldn’t be able to play God. People shouldn’t be able to decide whether someone should die for their actions. In my opinion, this statement is true. People should not be able to judge the fate of someone else. It is not their right. I think that criminals involve people when they plan on killing or hurting more people. Then for the good of the people, a criminal should be faced with the death penalty. Another counterargument the audience may have