An argument in favor of eye for an eye in dealing with crime

Contact Author Argument one: The death penalty doesn't work Any form of sentence should attempt to meet the aims of sentencing. These are retribution, rehabilitation, protection and prevention. One of the best arguments for the death penalty is that the one of these that the that death penalty successfully fulfills its retribution and generally western legal systems no longer consider retribution a primary factor when sentencing because the eye for an eye mentality is no longer seen as relevant or helpful.

An argument in favor of eye for an eye in dealing with crime

Anna Quindlen is one of many people who opposes the death penalty. She is a crime buff who has worked as a reporter for decades in some of the worst areas of New York. In her article, "Death Penalty's False Promise: An Eye for an Eye," she states how the death penalty and her have nothing in common.

She claims that the killing of one human being as punishment for the killing of another makes no sense and is inherently immoral. She tries to relate to her readers by using imagery, stating her opinions, and by appealing to the emotions of her readers.

Throughout her argument, she also uses many examples to back up her opinions. She gives examples of situations that appeal to her readers sentiments and makes them feel connected to the scenario.

Quindlen not only relates to the readers who oppose the death penalty, but she also relates to the readers who thinks it is a valid means of dealing with criminals.

Throughout the article, Quindlen targets both views of the death penalty; stating what the beneficial factors of each side of the death penalty are. She starts off her article talking about Ted Bundy and how he's murdered dozens of women.

Then she goes right back to saying "The deah penalty and I, on the other hand, seem to have nothing in common," stating her claim that she opposes the death penalty.

This technique Quindlen uses captures all of her readers; it allows the readers to feel that she is not trying to impose her opinions on her readers but rather, relate to them. One of the techniques that Quindlen uses is appealing to her audience's emotions.

She relates to her readers by connecting with the audience of both sides of the argument. At first, she states how she opposes the death penalty and how it's immoral, but then she relates to her readers by using an example of her daughter being clubbed to death while she was sleeping in a sorority house.

Quindlen is speaking to her readers on a personal level, telling them that even though she thinks the death penalty is wrong, she would have had the pleasure of killing the criminal herself. She is not only relating to her readers who oppose the death penalty, she is also relating to the readers who thinks the death penalty is a legitimate means of dealing with criminals.

Quindlen's method of appealing to her reader's emotions really captures their attention by showing her audience that she cares and conciders other people's opinions alongside her own.

Quindlen uses her opinions to relate to both views of the death penalty.

Yes, and I could go deeper.

She tries to relate to and get the attention of the readers who agree with the death penalty by saying for example, "the death penalty would act as a deterrent by eliminating recidivism.

Quindlen tries to relate to the opposing side of the death penalty by saying that "I think the killing of one human being as punishment for the killing of another makes no sense and inherently immoral.

In expressing her own opinions and giving examples to support them, Quindlen makes such a strong argument that it almost makes me want to re-examine my own opinions on the death penalty.

Quindlen uses several types of technique in her argument; one of which is imagery. Throughout her article, she uses numerous examples to support her claim. Certain examples that she described gave me such a vivid-mental-picture that i felt like i was in the scenario myself.

She appeals to her readers in a way that makes you feel like you are both in the scenario at the same time experiencing what is happening. She said that "people standing around the gurney waiting, made it more awful.Looking for arguments for the death penalty? Arguments for the death penalty A summery of the arguments for capital punishment.

If you are looking to argue in favor of the death penalty the below arguments should be of some help to you. She is a crime buff who has worked as a reporter for decades in some of the worst areas of New York.

In her article, "Death Penalty's False Promise: An Eye for an Eye," she states how the death penalty and her have nothing in common/5(1). In addition to certain guarantees provided by law, LegalZoom guarantees your satisfaction with our services and support.

Because our company was created by experienced attorneys, we strive to be the best legal document service on the web. Which of the following is an argument AGAINST the placement of probation services within the executive branch of government?

Answers: Under judicial control, services to persons on probation may receive a lower priority than services to the judge. She is a crime buff who has worked as a reporter for decades in some of the worst areas of New York.

In her article, "Death Penalty's False Promise: An Eye for an Eye," she states how the death penalty and her have nothing in common. She claims that the killing of one human being as punishment for the killing of another makes no sense and is.

This is the Biblical idea of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a Retributive justice includes a commitment to punishment that is proportional to the crime. But retributive justice cannot be reduced to a measure of proportionality (Moore 88).

D., , “What Might Retributive Justice Be?

An argument in favor of eye for an eye in dealing with crime

An Argument for the Confrontational.

The Principles of Argumentation