Christopher Hitchens Rhetorical Analysis

Capital punishment has been a controversial issue that still exists in America today. Capital punishment is a law passed by the government to punish any individual that has been convicted of committed a heinous crime. The death penalty has been a method used throughout history as punishment for criminals. The punishment also known as the death penalty is a scheduled execution, which would be done with lethal injection. The reason why this punishment is chosen is because when crimes are committed that shock the conscience, the immediate emotional reaction is to retaliate with severe punishment (Schnurbush 2016). The death penalty is debated when it is brought up, opinions vary from one group of people to another, one side says the execution is murder, and the other saying that it is justice being done. Each side presents valid arguments to why people should be for it or against it; people’s opinions are formed by personal beliefs.

In “The Death Penalty” (1985), David Bruck argues that the death penalty is injustice and that it is fury rather than justice that compels others to “demand that murderers be punished” by death. Bruck relies on varies cases of death row inmates to persuade the readers against capital punishment. His purpose is to persuade readers against the death penalty in order for them to realize that it is inhuman, irrational, and that “neither justice nor self-preservation demands that we kill men whom we have already imprisoned.” Bruck does not employ an array of devices but he does employ some such as juxtaposition, rhetorical questions, and appeals to strengthen his argument. He establishes an informal relationship with his audience of

The essay “A Hanging” by George Orwell speaks to the reader about the author’s stance on capital punishment. I believe that Orwell was able to communicate his point, without actually saying I’m against capital punishment, through three steps. The first step is to set the mood and bring you into his perspective. From the dreary description of the morning to the slow procession of the condemned man to the gallows, Orwell puts the reader in a mood that conveys the experience of watching a man die. The second step is to compare himself to the condemned man, showing how we are all equal. A life is a life, whether you are a condemned man or not. The third step is to show how everyone tries to cope with the aftermath of the execution. This

Capital punishment is a subject full of controversy. When it comes to the topic of the death penalty, most of us will readily agree that it’s a grim subject. Where this agreement usually ends however, is on the question of how necessary it is. Whereas some are convinced that capital punishment is not only cruel its useless as well, others maintain that it is necessary for justice to be adequately served . In the article “The Penalty of Death” by H.L. Mencken the author addresses the objections against the death penalty as well as his stand on the whole issue while using several rhetorical strategies to not only get his viewpoint across but, make the reader really think about their own stand on the death penalty. Three of the most effective

Capital Punishment is a moral controversy in today’s society. It is the judicial execution of criminals judged guilty of capital offenses by the state, or in other words, the death penalty. The first established death penalty laws can date back to the Eighteenth Century B.C. and the ethical debates towards this issue have existed just as long. There is a constant pro-con debate about this issue, and philosophers like Aristotle and Mill have their own take on this controversy as well. Aristotle is against capital punishment, while Mill believes it is morally permissible.

“The Penalty of Death” is an essay written by H. L. Mencken that discusses his positive view on the death penalty. Mencken feels strongly for the death penalty and makes arguments in contradiction of commonalities against the death penalty. Mencken also explains Aristotle’s view of catharsis and how he believes this is a reason people still give the death penalty. Along with this argument, Mencken also makes a statement against how long humans put off capital punishment from the time it is given to the time it is faced.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

The death penalty is a very controversial topic that has been the top of discussion for years around the world. Christopher Hitchens, a political journalist in Washington D.C., writes an essay entitled “Scenes from an Execution” in which it is clear that he is against it. To get his views across in the essay, he uses light humor rather than very serious scenarios directed toward it, although it is a very serious topic. For example, he says, “it is quite easy to book an appointment with death, and see for yourself your tax dollars at work” (Hitchens96). Christopher Hitchens uses rhetorical diction such as ethos, logos, and pathos to attack capital punishment also known as the death penalty.

In the essay, “A cruel and unusual kingdom”, by Leonard Pitts Jr. columnist for the Miami Herald, effectively argues that the use of the death penalty in the United States is inhumane, irrational and goes against American values. Though Pitts overall maintains a strong argument, writing style, and voice, he purely targets a supportive audience as he doesn’t include clear common ground nor a refutation of the other bias.

Capital punishment, the state imposed penalty of death, continues to be one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American public policy. Since the earliest days of its employment in the colonial era until today, citizens have struggles with the issue of when and under what circumstances the taking of a human life by the state can be morally or legally justified. For some opponents of the death penalty, the simple answer is that the taking of a human life is always morally and ethically wrong, even when conducted under the auspices of state authority as a legal punishment. In contrast, proponents of capital punishment have contended with equal fervor that the death penalty is morally justified as a form of retributive justice,

If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers

Pew Research states that support for the death penalty has been declining for the past twenty years. (Masci) However there are still many people who still support capital punishment, and the debate about it still rages on in the United States. People such as Edward Koch who in his essay “Death and Justice” supports the use of capital punishment but David Bruck’s essay “The Death Penalty” challenges the use of the death penalty. Although both authors are discussing the same topic, they both use of rhetorical devices t reflects the different sides that they each are proposing and ultimately, Koch’s use of ethos is more effective.

Death penalty or capital punishment is a legal procedure carried out by the government of a state which sentences a convicted person to death. Capital punishment has been a matter of controversy for various decades now. According to some people, such as the Swiss President Burkhalter (2014) death penalty is a valid act of justice whereas, Coretta Scott King opposes such practices. The main purpose of this argumentative synthesis essay is to point out the differences and similarities between the two articles, namely “The Death Penalty is a step back” by Coretta Scott King (1969) and “The Penalty of Death” by H.L.Mencken (1926), and to also the validity of the arguments provided. Both Mencken and King provide their own opinions on the issue of death penalty; whether it is an ethical practice or not.

The article I see a killer die by Alan hall was exceedingly provocative (ergo the compelling need to respond to it) but also cryptic. Personally, the content of the article made me feel a variety of emotions: the most prominent being vast irritation alongside resentment. Astounded with some segments of the article, I took the liberty upon myself to thoroughly analyse all segments of this article and came to a very clear conclusion: capital punishment is a cruel, inhumane and degrading way to leave the Earth.