Death Penalty Persuasive Speech

Improved Essays
Good afternoon. I am here this afternoon to fight for your rights: your right to deny death penalty; your right to no cruel or unusual punishments; your right to say Who exactly, gives us the right to kill? If killing is wrong, then why are we allowed to kill? According to John Grisham. The eighth amendment states that, Prohibits excessive fines and excessive bail, as well as cruel and unusual punishment. Today I will present research conducted by those who make their belief clear; this research will show you that, beyond a doubt, our argument is the stronger one: Death penalty should be abolished. The politician Nelson Mandela once said ¨The death sentence is a barbaric act . . . It is a reflection of the animal instinct still in human beings.¨ …show more content…
In research conducted by Opposing Viewpoints, ¨That´s 1 death row inmate found to be wrongly convicted for every 7 executed.¨ In other words this quote says that around 402 death row convicts killed wrongly. (since January 1, 2018). In research conducted by Opinion Front, ¨High probability of innocent people being hanged due to human judgement error.¨. This states that many of the people being hanged are innocent. Our opponents may argue that that money may be an issue to keeping them in prison until we have definite evidence to sentence them or free them but, according to Anti-death penalty, ¨$ 2 million per person vs. $500,000(4x as much!).¨. It cost $2 million dollars to kill someone by death penalty and $500,000 to keep him/her/them in prison. Let me tell you a story ¨In 1997, Pedro Medina's head caught fire while he was being electrocuted in Florida. State Attorney General Bob Butterworth commented, ´People who wish to commit murder, they better not do it in the state of Florida, because we may have a problem with our electric chair.´¨. This man is a symbol of cruel and unusual punishment. Many people everywhere are hoping that death penalty will be abolished for this reason. One´s famous last words was ¨I know you´ve come to kill me. Shoot, your only going to kill a man.¨ This is a quote of innocence and surrender. The 8th amendment: …show more content…
This alternative is to sentence a person to prison for life. My opponents may argue that it would be easier to execute them quickly and move on, but this can lead to a unfair trial and cause innocent blood to spill. I see a different and new way to stop putting blood on our hands. Like in math there is more than one way to solve something. In Opposing Viewpoints it stated, ¨Many of those on death row may no longer be threats to society. Some, no doubt, may be. But for those who are, there are options less cruel and unusual that do not put society at risk. Life without parole is one. A lengthy sentence with treatment, with release conditional upon proof of rehabilitation, is another.¨. In Anti-death penalty it explains a new viewpoint, ¨Life in prison also guarantees no future crimes.¨. One last point Remy de Gourmont said, ¨There is no doubt that the supporters of the death penalty have more in common with murders than its opponents.¨. This is meant to mean that you should be more worried on those supporting than against this

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    They are worried America might execute an innocent person. However, they can prevent this by taking extra care in examining cases and evidence to make sure they do not mess up. Also, the rate of believed to be innocent people is very low. Usually with a doubt they might be innocent they just get a life sentence. “although the horrific detai­l once executions start may change some minds” (Callick).…

    • 1827 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He stands firm on his first argument, saying that the death penalty is not only the best but the only deterrent to crime. Ernest says the objection of life imprisonment is a light slap on the wrist and is not geared enough. Imprisonment only gives murderers more time to plot and scheme it does not change other criminal minds about making the same mistake. Some opponents of Haag stand argue that people have a right to life and morally we should not use capital punishment. An objection that Haag uses is that the right to life is forfeited if the crime that is broken is severe enough.…

    • 1380 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Repeal Capital Punishment

    • 2254 Words
    • 9 Pages

    For most it 's the one everyone would guess; They say the Death Penalty is necessary because it serves as a warning to criminals, provides closure for the victims and the only punishment fit for murder? So murdering is fit for killing someone who has just murdered another person. ("English 15." English 15. N.p., 11 Nov.…

    • 2254 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If we accidentally put to death the wrong person according to burns we should feel angry, and someone should pay for this innocent persons death. So, following Burns theory should the Judge, the jury, or the executioner be put to death for this innocent person, or should all of them be put to death? They all had their part in this innocents death, and had a choice to not do it, even if it was their job. According to Burns someone has to be held accountable for this persons death, so who should be choose? This is where burns theory falls apart, because I don’t think burns himself could even answer this question without making, some sort of loophole in his theory.…

    • 1468 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If we enforced the death penalty there wouldn’t be as many prisoners in prison; they would be executed. Here many people who despise the death penalty would probably object that capital punishment is not the moral solution to such a problem. Regardless, we need a solution and we need it fast. The death penalty can help the prisons from becoming too full. Just letting prisoners out isn’t helping the cause because most prisoners go back to prison with in three years or so anyways.…

    • 1122 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Nathanson believes that punishment does not need to be hundred percent the same, it just needs to inflict the same amount of suffering. The retributivist Nathanson is he cannot support the death penalty. His theory states that he is proportionality based, where you can choose the highest severity for a crime but never reaching the death penalty. This is where a ranking system is created, setting the most upper limit to life in prison avoiding a barbaric punishment. Nathanson believes that human dignity matters, we may punish people for their crimes but deprive them everything which is what the death penalty does (Nathanson, p.544).…

    • 1083 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In this chapter Stephen Nathanson discusses the symbolism of abolishing the death penalty, and claims that we express a respect for each person’s rights by refraining from depriving a murder of someone’s life. The death penalty has been an argument for decades now and still discussed if someone actually does deserve the death penalty. Stephen explains his view towards this claim, and identifies how this moral problem could be resolved. There are ways you could solve this problem but resolving claims in a certain way always have its’s cons as well. In my opinion a Subjectivism system could resolve the dilemma our society is having with the death penalty.…

    • 1274 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We have things like life imprisonment without parole. This would allow the criminal to not only get to live, but prevent them from doing any other crimes. This also follows the 5th amendment which is right to life as well as the 8th amendment which is the government cannot do any harsh or cruel punishments. Justice is brought this way too without more deaths occurring. Also, life without parole allows mistakes to be corrected whereas once the death penalty has been inflicted.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In today’s society murder is frequent and common that many individuals just look the other way when they read about murder happening. For example, Gelernter was attacked by the criminal that goes by the name of the “Unabomber”. When convicted of his crimes, the Unabomber received eight life sentences instead of the death penalty. The world just shrugged their shoulders when finding out he committed murder. Gelernter felt that there was no powerful statement against him.…

    • 987 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The alternative to capital punishment is a life sentence. A life sentence is to keep someone in prison for the remainder of his life. Firstly, a life sentence is more humane than capital punishment because it involves no death, rather life sentence makes the offender regret his wrongdoing by thinking about his misdeed. Secondly, Life sentence gives the offender the opportunity to deeply repent for his sin and makes the culprit spend longer time repenting and asking God for salvation. While it is a reality that capital punishment gives you a chance to repent and ask for salvation too, however, life sentence gives the offender a longer time to repent and ask for salvation.…

    • 1408 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays