Rhetorical Analysis Of The Death Penalty By Jeff Jacoby

In this article, written on September 28, 2003 for The Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby expresses his opinions about the death penalty; he thinks that the death penalty is a system that has its weaknesses and errors, however he believes it is a system that needs to be in place to pro-tect us. The article aims to persuade the reader and to outline key points, why the death penalty should be accepted by the public and all. I will be evaluating and analysing the article discussing the techniques used by Jeff Jacoby to persuade, engage and convince the readers.

In the first paragraph Jeff Jacoby shows sympathy towards the readers because he knows no law is “100 per cent infallible” so by showing sympathy he is reassuring the audience that he is on their side like the Government and wants the best for them, but he is also truthful at the same time by informing them that there will always be imperfections, nothing can be flawless as we are humans and mistakes will always occur. …show more content…
Even though both ‘capi-tal punishment’ and ‘death penalty’ have the same meaning, one sounds more harsh and aggressive than the other. This indicates that Jeff Jacoby addresses to ‘capital punishment’ whenever he is trying to persuade the readers (as it sounds less grim). However, he uses ‘death penalty’ to outline or exaggerate a point, such as, ‘the death penalty in America is probably the most accurately administered criminal sanction in the world’. The use of ‘death penalty’ in this sentence emphasises the importance of allowing the death penalty as it pro-tects us every