Coretta Scott King On Capital Punishment

The Reverend Jesse L. Jackson Sr., the former presidential candidate, writes “Legal Lynching The Death Penalty And American’s Future”. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., wrote this book in the company of his son Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., a United State congressman from Illinois since 1995, and Nation writer Bruce Shapiro a contributing editor at National and a national correspondent for Salon.com, and the professor at Yale University. In this book Jackson’s keep his moderated argument about the death penalty. There are nine chapters in this book, each chapter tackle a different facet of the argument. This book describes the history of the death penalty, myths, lies and deterrence, bureaucratic nightmare involving defense lawyers sleeping at trial, “A Question of Innocent”, “Deathly Numbers: Race and Geography of Execution”, “False Closure: Victims Rights Versus Vengeance Rights”, “Social of Executioners” and “The Death Penalty and American’s Future: Moratorium and Beyond. Authors begin with the proposal of a moratorium and could lead to the eventual cessation of capital punishment.

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

He uses the KKK statement to transition into discussing Ernest Knighton’ case to indicate that race is another factor in deciding whether a person should be executed. Moreover, he states that people are ruled by fury rather than justice when wanting capital punishment for murderers. Finally he finalizes his argument by asserting that the electric chair was made by a governor who was in favor of lynching to bring justice.

The debate on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished has been ongoing for quite a long period of time. While there are those who believe that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose, proponents of the same are convinced that the relevance of the same cannot be overstated and hence it should not be abolished. In this text, I examine the arguments for and against the death penalty.

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

In Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood, the author confronts the reader with the discussion of the need for the death penalty, by presenting the issue through the characters of Dick Hickock and Perry Smith. He writes, “Our state provides that the punishment for murder in the first degree shall be imprisonment for life or death by hanging. That is the law. You, gentlemen, are here to enforce it. And if ever there was a case in which the maximum penalty was justified, this is it.” (27-31) The Prosecuting Attorney Logan Green uses the law as a justification of the death penalty. This statement clarifies the penalty and proves the necessity of its use. The Attorney views this to be the prominent solution, in which anything less would be too fair to the murderers. He then states, “So gentlemen, what are you going to do?

In “The Death Penalty is a Step Back” is a written essay by Coretta Scott King, argues that the death penalty is unethical and illegitimate. In doing so, she develops this strong statement by, first, establishing her moral right to make this statement and to promote a non-violence over the death penalty.

“After analyzing “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” you could reasonably conclude that King has written an effective argument that is likely to convince his readers that his presence in Birmingham is both justified and necessary.” (Kirszner and Mandell 102) King is successfully able to portray his thoughts and feelings to his readers by explaining why it is necessary to take more forceful measures but also explaining how said measures can be

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 death penalty is a very controversial topic that has been the top of discussion for years around the world. It is a topic that many individuals feel very strongly about. 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. Instead of ranting about opinions, Hitchens writes about his experiences and how others as well as himself were affected. He uses rhetorical devices such as ethos, logos, and pathos to attack capital punishment.

During the discussion of this point, he explains that the costing of both options equal out at the end since, the person being executed is always entitled to legal appeals, and the expenses of those appeals have to be covered by the state. The Author, then introduced his fourth reason by quoting a statement that was made by Coretta Scott King, in which she clearly opposes the death penalty even though two of her family members have been a victim of a murderer; the Author supports her stand and feels that “Justice is never advanced by the taking of a human life”. Then the author points out his fifth reason for why he is against the death penalty, which is that justice isn’t always perfected, and so there is always a possibility for mistakes which results as making wrong decisions, that would cost the lives of many innocent’s. Finally, the last point Shalom makes is how racism comes into play, and influences the judge when making such decisions of giving someone a death penalty, which he supports by providing facts from a

While the topic can be overwhelming and complex, it is important to study the racist institution of the death penalty because execution is the ultimate expression of which individuals are valued by our society and which are considered dispensable. What the US expresses through its executions carries some racist undertones when we look at the races of the persons being executed, but it takes on a clearly racial direction when we consider the race of the original murder victim. For example, "the most comprehensive study of the death penalty found that killers of whites were eleven times more likely to be condemned to death than killers of African- Americans."3 On the flip side, "only 31 of the over 18,000 executions in this country's history involved a white person being punished for killing a Black person."4 In capital punishment, we find the modernday counterpart to lynching. Of course, lynching often meant sporadic acts of individual racism. Selective killing today is an official, bureaucratized act of the state and therefore an official statement of what our government stands for. And what the government stands for is the most complete disempowerment possible - death - for a large number of Black individuals.

Both Twain and King present claims, evidence, and assumptions in their essays to convince us of the human tendencies. Twain, shaming us to reform by arguing that people are the lowest of the animals, ironically blaming our moral conscience. Opposed to King, persuading us of the necessity for our survival. He frightens us to be improved humans and seek peace to avoid

A. Attention Getter: Thou shall not kill, only one of the ten commandments that some individuals unfortunately can not seem to uphold. What would the world look like if we did not have an “eye for an eye” mentality? The debate about whether or not capital punishment is ethical or immoral is significant because our country is spending unnecessary amounts on death penalty executions, in which citizens do not know enough about the subject matter to disagree or protest its use. While tax payers are paying for this procedure, the death penalty poses many moral insurrections.

In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.