On Death Commented [AM1]: Slanted language: incredibly

negative connotations (from lesson)

Commented [AM2]: Sounds like they’re living in paradise,
they’re not. So, this is slanted language: sure, they live out
We live in a more liberal and forward-thinking society that we ever have before. This has led to many their lives, but not in paradise, their lives are extremely
wonderful things: gender equality, racial equality, religious freedom, and social supports for our most limited.
vulnerable members of society. Unfortunately, our liberal society also has drawbacks. The most violent
and abhorrent criminals in our society are able to live out their lives in our tax-payer-funded prisons. The Commented [AM3]: Circular thinking: sounds like the
argument he/she is trying to make is already true. (From
only real solution for this problem is to bring back the death penalty. lesson)
Commented [AM4]: Murderers aren’t released, ex. look
The death penalty may seem like a complicated moral and political issue, but it’s actually very simple. Is
at Adnan Syed. Either way, if some inmate is “worthy” of
it fair that murderers should be allowed to serve out their sentences and then potentially be released the death penalty, then they probably already have a life
back into society to kill again? The death penalty has been around as long as mankind has. It is necessary sentence in prison, it’s not like they’re getting out anyway.
The is faulty expression: someone who might “meet the
to get rid of our most dangerous offenders and keep innocent people safe. requirements” for a death penalty will FOR SURE have a
minimum life sentence. They won’t be getting out.
Some people might argue that a death penalty is immoral and uncivilized, but those people are typical
Commented [AM5]: Appeal to traditions. Kind of sounds
“bleeding-heart liberals.” It’s easy for them to argue this point of view until they become the victims of a like “well we’ve done it for so long so let’s keep going…”
violent crime. Commented [AM6]: Aren’t they in prison? Doesn’t that
mean the outside world is safe?
Today’s prison system is overcrowded and under-funded. By getting rid of the monsters in our prison This is appealing to indirect consequences, it’s insignificant.
system, we can make room for less violent offenders who actually could stand a chance of being No murderer will get out of jail, so from the moment
he/she’s captured, the innocent people are safe. Not a valid
rehabilitated. It’s unconscionable to allow murderers to live on the tax-payer’s dime. argument.

Some argue that a death penalty does not prevent murder. There have been murderers throughout Commented [AM7]: Generalization, broad. “All people
against death penalty are liberals.” Just because one doesn’t
history and there always will be murderers. If I were to consider killing someone, I’d think twice if I knew believe in the death penalty doesn’t mean they’re liberal.
getting caught could mean I’d face the death penalty. You can’t tell me other people wouldn’t have the Also, this is sounds like either-or-thinking: “if you’re not
with me you’re wrong.”
same thought.
Commented [AM8]: False, Canada’s 2018 Jail/Prison
It may seem hypocritical to use death as a penalty for murder but if you actually think about it, it’s the Budget was $5 Billion, compared to $3 Billion federal ...
most just sentence: an eye for an eye. We must reinstate the death penalty or condemn our innocent Commented [AM9]: Slanted language again, but can’t
fully condemn seeing as you wouldn’t call a murder a
children to live in a more dangerous society. normal person.
Commented [AM10]: Slanted language, gives negative
connotation, can be just “offenders”.
Commented [AM11]: Sure, they’re living, but once again,
it sounds like they’re living in paradise on the tax-payer’s
dime. They’re not. So once again, slanted language. ...
Commented [AM12]: That’s called sane thinking,
murderers are murderers because they’re INSANE, so they ...
Commented [AM13]: Sure, maybe others may have had
the thought, but way too few to make a difference. People
committing murder know they’re getting life in jail and still ...
Commented [AM14]: Sure, but that’s only half the story.
The revised essay is on the next page, the thesis has been kept the same. The other half is that you’re bringing yourself down to the
murder’s level. Just because the murderer did doesn’t mean...
Commented [AM15]: Either-or-Thinking. Not really, I
mean, people who might receive the death penalty are ...
(I do not necessarily agree with the stance in this essay, I just kept the same thesis, don’t think I’m a
monster…)

We live in a more liberal and forward-thinking society that we ever have before. This has led to
many wonderful things: gender equality, racial equality, religious freedom, and social supports
for our most vulnerable members of society. Unfortunately, our liberal society also has
drawbacks. The criminals who commit the most violent crimes in our society are able to live out
their lives in our tax-payer-funded prisons. Although it’s not paradise, it’s resource, money, and
time consuming when they’re going to die there anyway. One sound solution for this problem is
to bring back the death penalty.

The death penalty may seem like a complicated moral and political issue, but it’s actually very
simple. Is it fair that murderers should be allowed to serve out their sentences when they’re just
going to die with absolutely no effect on society? Is it worth spending all those resources and
tax-payer money keeping them alive to contribute nothing to society until they die? It is
necessary to get rid of our most dangerous offenders to save and redirect time and resources to
where they’ll actually make a difference.

Some people might argue that a death penalty is immoral and uncivilized, but they most likely
don’t know the numbers –the resources saved by the death penalty. It’s easy for them to argue
this point of view until they research the numbers or, knock on wood, become the victims of a
violent crime where then emotion takes over.

Today’s prison system is overcrowded. By getting rid of the prisoners who committed monstrous
crimes in our prison system, we can make room for offenders who actually could stand a chance
of being rehabilitated. It’s unconscionable to allow murderers to live on the tax-payer’s dime
when they’re going to finish their life with no contribution to society, why not redirect the
money and resources to other places that need it?

Some argue that a death penalty does not prevent murder. There have been murderers throughout
history and there always will be murderers. A death penalty would be a small help in lowering
murder rates; a tiny portion of murders would be stopped by the mere thought of the death
penalty.

It may seem hypocritical to use death as a penalty for murder but if you actually think about it,
it’s a just sentence: an eye for an eye. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The death
penalty should be reinstated for a more efficient, and faster advancing –due to redirected
resources-- society.
 Works Cited

John-Howard. (2019, July 11). Financial facts on Canadian prisons. Retrieved July 14, 2020,

from https://johnhoward.ca/blog/financial-facts-canadian-prisons/