Death Penalty Argumentative Analysis

The death penalty is a controversial and heated topic. While some have strong reasons to be in support of it, others have strong reasons to be against it. The reading by Nathanson, the news article I have selected, and the movie Last Dance either implicitly or explicitly give reasons to be against the death penalty. Berns presents an argument in support of the death penalty. I will analyze these sources and consider the multiple perspectives in a critical manner. I will begin by analyzing Berns’ argument. He starts by describing examples of crimes that people have a right to be justifiably angry about, such as someone being murdered (Berns 312). He uses an example of a mob of people wanting justice and argues that the law should provide such …show more content…
Death may be seen as the “ultimate punishment” because the criminal dies, but this is a matter of opinion. With this person’s life being put to an end, so is the opportunity for this individual to ruin the lives of others by his or her actions. Others may feel that life is prison without the possibility of parole is a more severe crime as the criminal is forced to live with his or her actions until the individual dies. By choosing life in prison without the possibility of parole instead of the death penalty, this does not mean that one does not care about the victim. Both types of punishment, depending on one‘s perspective, can be seen as a way to show that society cares about how the victim suffered as a result of the actions of the criminal. Berns would disagree with this analysis and with Nathanson’s logic, arguing that capital punishment must be used as it the most …show more content…
He first says that it shows that human beings have value, regardless of the actions that they take in their lives (319). This is referring to the idea that each person, as a human being, has a minimal innate worth that cannot be taken away as a result of how one acts or by how one is treated by others. If this is true, it calls into question directly whether the death penalty is moral and should be used to punish human beings for their actions. Furthermore, Nathanson describes how abolishing the death penalty will teach society that each life is precious and that violence should be minimally used (322). One’s perspective will determine one’s response, something that Nathanson does not take into account. Some may see the symbolism in the way that Nathanson describes. While he may argue that he is respecting human lives by abolishing the death penalty, others may argue that he is not respecting the victim of the crime who had his or her life taken or experienced something traumatically