Since we looked at Michael Traynor’s editorial “The death penalty — it’s unworkable” in class last Tuesday, as well as three comments to it originally published on the Los Angeles Times website, I thought I would give everyone a chance to respond to Traynor’s argument for abolishing the death penalty. Do you agree or disagree with Traynor’s claim that “we cannot devise a death penalty system that will ensure fairness in process or outcome, or even that innocent people will not be executed”? Read through the editorial carefully, examine the evidence and reasoning Traynor uses to support his opinion, and explain why you agree or disagree with his argument.
Here is the address for the editorial:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-traynor4-2010feb04,0,5153396.story
Your response, whether you respond to this or the first option, must be at least 150 words in length and is due by March 2nd.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Personally, I feel as though there is no way that the United States can come up with a way to ensure that someone will not be wrongly convicted in cases that would result in the death penalty. I feel as though our court system and process are mostly to blame. I do not think it is fair that someone, just because of their economic background should be appointed by the state a lawyer who is sub-par. I feel as though no matter the degree of the crime, the wealthy are at an advantage because they can hire big time lawyers. For example, Paris Hilton who had concessions made for her case because of her social status and monetary advantage. I feel that if we can’t sufficiently uphold a system where everyone is treated equally and justice is TRULY blind, that at the very least the appeal system should be revised.
t. wellborn
With there being so many different situations surrounding the terms of which one would receive the death penalty, this is a very difficult subject to argue for or against, and one that I am still indecisive of. I do believe that murders should be punished, but I am a Christian, and with the sixth commandment being “Thou Shall Not Kill” I do believe it is absolutely morally wrong to commit murder, which includes the death penalty. I would say I do agree with Traynor on there not being a fair way to execute a human being. I understand that keeping a person in jail is very costly, but can you put a price on a human life? If someone you were close to commit a murder would you want them to be sentenced the death penalty? I would say I think that punishment is right yes, but death? I believe that life is too precious, and these people kill because there is something wrong internally. Can they change the way they are? Maybe, maybe not, but they should not be killed. Two wrongs do not make a right.
-Amy Yealy
Bart said…
Personally, I have mixed emotions on the death penalty. At one point the notion of killing a human being based on the violation of a crime. And the other, how do you deal repeat offenders of hainous crimes that don’t respond to prison time. Traynor’s editorial “The death penalty — it’s unworkable”, was a typical response to the issue at hand. Touching on the monetary issues of keeping an inmate looked up, and the rate of death row inmates that die before there sentence is carried out. My take on the issue, has to do more with how you punish an individual. In some cases I believe that the death penalty is effective in others maybe not as much. For example individuals that create hainous crimes might not have a problem with a life sentence or the death penalty either because prison has become a second home to them, or that the individual frame of thought might look at death as inevitable. I believe that judges need to become more creative in their means of punishment. Not just taking the easy way out, such as prescribing the death penalty as if it is an answer for everything, but really challenging the judicial system to become more evolved in the means of punishment
Yes I agree with Traynor’s argument that we cannot come up with a death penalty that will ensure fairness and ensure that people will not be wrongfully executed. However, I believe that there is a problem with the entire prison system along with the death penalty. If we abolish the death penalty we will have to spend millions of tax dollars on prisoners and if we keep the death penalty system we have now it will not be any different because it takes too long to get through the appeals. I would like to see us work towards finding an alternate system for punishment that will actually deter people from committing crimes. I am not against the death penalty, but I hate to think of the possibility that we could be murdering innocent and wrongfully convicted citizens. I don’t have the answer and nor do I believe it will come easily but I think the system for death penalty is inconsistent.
Michael Brannon
Post a Comment