Dating back to the earliest civilizations, the death penalty has been a form of punishment seen in nearly every type of governed society as a payment for crimes that range from extremely malicious to what most today would view as petty. The forms of executions have varied vastly over the years, with many first class societies today moving towards an attempt at a humane and dignified form of execution. Also, many societies around the world have abolished the act of execution as punishment, and many more countries seem to be following suit. In the article titled Executions Should Be Televised by Zachary Shemtob and David Lat, Shemtob and Lat argue that state executions of convicted felons sentenced to death should be recorded and made available
…show more content…
The main evidence is a case example of Roy Blankenship, a convicted felon who was executed with pentobarbital (barbiturate) in Georgia in June of 2011. The evidence explains how “[Blankenship] jerked his head, grimaced, gasped, and lurched, according to a medical expert’s affidavit” (7). The presented evidence is strong because having ideas of these graphic events that led to Blankenship’s death shows a major red flag under the 8th Amendment of the Constitution. What is supposed to be the safe and humane method of execution turns out to have the capability to pose much of the inhumane consequences seen in other execution forms that induce “unnecessary” suffering when executing. This evidence, however, fails to disclose how prevalent incidences such as these occur in lethal execution. The reader is left with assuming that because one case happened, then it must happen with all cases. Though Shemtob and Lat refer to a recent case in Georgia (which will be discussed later), it still leaves ambiguity in the use of lethal injection. This argument becomes a hasty generalization due to the fact that no greater evidence on lethal injection contradiction prevalence is presented. If more detailed stories were presented, the argument may have room to be easily challenged. So the …show more content…
Shemtob and Lat include these opposition remarks as a way to side-step from their personal belief of the death-penalty, but end up hurting their argument for push towards accountability and transparency of the government. The cons unfortunately for them outweigh the pros in the article from failure to efficiently justify flaws in oppositional viewpoints. Through evaluating the key arguments made on their behalf, the thesis is visible that their goal is a movement towards the abolishment of the death penalty, and simply not televising just for interest in where tax dollars are spent. In comparison to the objectives, the arguments are stronger, but still possess flaws and omitted evidence that manipulate the validity of the argument. Collectively, the arguments and counter-arguments create ambiguity of the true message to take away from the article. The thesis of televising for transparency and accountability is the stepping stone to the second thesis of abandoning the death penalty entirely. Unfortunately, the weakened initial thesis from the insufficient evidence used will leave a gap in connecting the audience to the second
The main evidence is a case example of Roy Blankenship, a convicted felon who was executed with pentobarbital (barbiturate) in Georgia in June of 2011. The evidence explains how “[Blankenship] jerked his head, grimaced, gasped, and lurched, according to a medical expert’s affidavit” (7). The presented evidence is strong because having ideas of these graphic events that led to Blankenship’s death shows a major red flag under the 8th Amendment of the Constitution. What is supposed to be the safe and humane method of execution turns out to have the capability to pose much of the inhumane consequences seen in other execution forms that induce “unnecessary” suffering when executing. This evidence, however, fails to disclose how prevalent incidences such as these occur in lethal execution. The reader is left with assuming that because one case happened, then it must happen with all cases. Though Shemtob and Lat refer to a recent case in Georgia (which will be discussed later), it still leaves ambiguity in the use of lethal injection. This argument becomes a hasty generalization due to the fact that no greater evidence on lethal injection contradiction prevalence is presented. If more detailed stories were presented, the argument may have room to be easily challenged. So the …show more content…
Shemtob and Lat include these opposition remarks as a way to side-step from their personal belief of the death-penalty, but end up hurting their argument for push towards accountability and transparency of the government. The cons unfortunately for them outweigh the pros in the article from failure to efficiently justify flaws in oppositional viewpoints. Through evaluating the key arguments made on their behalf, the thesis is visible that their goal is a movement towards the abolishment of the death penalty, and simply not televising just for interest in where tax dollars are spent. In comparison to the objectives, the arguments are stronger, but still possess flaws and omitted evidence that manipulate the validity of the argument. Collectively, the arguments and counter-arguments create ambiguity of the true message to take away from the article. The thesis of televising for transparency and accountability is the stepping stone to the second thesis of abandoning the death penalty entirely. Unfortunately, the weakened initial thesis from the insufficient evidence used will leave a gap in connecting the audience to the second