Home » Uncategorized » What is a good thesis statement for an argumentative essay being against the death penalty?

What is a good thesis statement for an argumentative essay being against the death penalty?





This is what I have so far. 1.The death penalty is the most horrendous ways to end someone's life. This puts a burden on the econmical and human resources of the judicial system...2.The death penalty should be kept out of the judicial system. We should be able to live peacefully and not live according to the popular saying, "an eye for an eye".



Similar Asks:

  • Essay closing paragraph help? - I need help on making my closing paragraph stronger please anything helps.Can you imagine being tied to a bed like a helpless animal? Can you imagine getting injected with drugs that completely shutdown your system? What about a bunch of people watching it all happen and not doing anything about it? That’s what happens when
  • Death Penalty Argumentative Essay plzz help? - we are assigned to do an argumentative essay and i did it over The Death Penalty. i got it back with corrections and i put “i believe that only deterrent for a murder to not commit a crime again would be execution” my teach wrote by that says but that’s what the death penalty is,
  • What would be a good attention grabber for an essay on ow illegal immigration negatively effects the us? - Welfare precipitants come to mind. They come over here for a better life no doubt. The difference between the ones coming from Mexico and the ones coming from other countries is that they come here legally and they contribute to society. Just in Harris County alone the HCHD reports over 10,000 babies were delivered to
  • Bored enough to do an essay for me? - A detailed Report which outlines the Economic Management for this Island. You have arrived on the island by 18ft yacht that was damaged in the storm. There are 20 including you who survived the storm.Word Limit: 800 – 1000 wordsThe Task: B Concepts: Systems• rights and responsibilities within systems (roles, who is responsible? For
  • Hiroshima bombing –effect on US economy? - So, building the bomb used about $2 billion dollars. If the bomb HADN’T been used, it would have been a HUGE waste of resources…what kind of effect would this have had on the US economy?I am writing and essay on why using the bomb was GOOD, and one of my points is that if they
  • What types of groups are against the death penalty? - I need this to help me on an essay about the death penalty.
  • Can someone please edit my essay? - Healthcare has two side of whether people think it should be free or we should pay for it ourselves. Well the debate is still going on but I know the humanly idea in society should be having free healthcare. Everyone deserves a fair chance to live. For those who don’t have enough money they can




2 Responses so far.

  1. overneat says:

    We can live peacefully without basing our criminal justice system on the once popular saying “an eye for an eye.” The death penalty is intrinsically flawed and serves only revenge and retribution. Neither is a good enough reason to use it.I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.The worst thing about it. Errors:The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed for setting the fire that killed his children, based on what even the Texas Forensics Science Commission acknowledges was junk science. Modern forensics has shown the fire was accidental, not arson. We’ll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. As of now, 140 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict. Keeping killers off the streets for good:Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages: -an innocent person serving life can be released from prison -life without parole costs less than the death penaltyCosts, a surprise to many people:Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. Since the stakes are so high, the process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death. Crime reduction (deterrence):The death penalty doesn’t keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent.Who gets it:The death penalty isn’t reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn’t apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed?Victims: People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn’t necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported it in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

  2. supraprotest says:

    OrThe Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents The death penalty has a foundation in justice and it spares more innocent lives. Anti death penalty arguments are either false or the pro death penalty arguments are stronger. The majority populations of all countries may support the death penalty for some crimes (1). Why? Justice. THE DEATH PENALTY: SAVING MORE INNOCENT LIVES Of all endeavors that put innocents at risk, is there one with a better record of sparing innocent lives than the US death penalty? Unlikely. 1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives [external link] … 2) Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty [external link] … MORAL FOUNDATIONS: DEATH PENALTY PT. 1 1) Saint (‘ Pope) Pius V: “The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder.” “The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent” (1566). 2) Pope Pius XII; “When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live.” 9/14/52. 3) John Murray: “Nothing shows the moral bankruptcy of a people or of a generation more than disregard for the sanctity of human life.” “… it is this same atrophy of moral fiber that appears in the plea for the abolition of the death penalty.” “It is the sanctity of life that validates the death penalty for the crime of murder. It is the sense of this sanctity that constrains the demand for the infliction of this penalty. The deeper our regard for life the firmer will be our hold upon the penal sanction which the violation of that sanctity merit.” (Page 122 of Principles of Conduct). 4) Immanuel Kant: “If an offender has committed murder, he must die. In this case, no possible substitute can satisfy justice. For there is no parallel between death and even the most miserable life, so that there is no equality of crime and retribution unless the perpetrator is judicially put to death.”. “A society that is not willing to demand a life of somebody who has taken somebody else’s life is simply immoral.” 5) Billy Graham: “God will not tolerate sin. He condemns it and demands payment for it. God could not remain a righteous God and compromise with sin. His holiness and His justice demand the death penalty.” ( “The Power of the Cross,” published in the Apr. 2007 issue of Decision magazine ). 6) Theodore Roosevelt: “It was really heartrending to have to see the kinfolk and friends of murderers who were condemned to death, and among the very rare occasions when anything governmental or official caused me to lose sleep were times when I had to listen to some poor mother making a plea for a criminal so wicked, so utterly brutal and depraved, that it would have been a crime on my part to remit his punishment.”. 7) Jean-Jacques Rousseau: “Again, every rogue who criminously attacks social rights becomes, by his wrong, a rebel and a traitor to his fatherland. By contravening its laws, he ceases to be one of its citizens: he even wages war against it. In such circumstances, the State and he cannot both be saved: one or the other must perish. In killing the criminal, we destroy not so much a citizen as an enemy. The trial and judgments are proofs that he has broken the Social Contract, and so is no longer a member of the State.” (The Social Contract). 8) John Locke: “A criminal who, having renounced reason… hath, by the unjust violence and slaughter he hath committed upon one, declared war against all mankind, and therefore may be destroyed as a lion or tyger, one of those wild savage beasts with whom men can have no society nor security.” And upon this is grounded the great law of Nature, “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” Second Treatise of Civil Government. == “Moral/ethical Death Penalty Support: Christian and secular Scholars” [external link] … “The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge” [external link] … “The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation” [external link] … “Killing Equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents” [external link] … == 1) US Death Penalty Support at 80%; World Support Remains High [external link] … Much more, upon request. [email not allowed]