1) In this letter, the author expresses their support of the use of the death penalty, making the claim that it is morally justified and serves as a deterrent.
2) In support of his argument, the author provides several pieces of evidence and arguments to support his claim. To support his claim, he initially argues that the death penalty serves as a deterrent and is morally justifiable. He continues his argument on morality by stating his belief that when one has raped and murdered a child, the person deserves to die and no longer has the right to life. In this letter, the author justifies the moral use of the death penalty with a quote from President Obama, insinuating that there are such crimes so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of outrage and meting out the ultimate punishment. Following that, the…show more content… Committing a crime deserves a punishment, this punishment does not have to be death. The death penalty inhibits humans inheritance and rightfulness to life. It is said that “moral people are more worthy than viciously immoral ones” (Pojman, 141) however, this ideal is unjust. No one has the right to take someone else's life and should not be given the power to make a judgment call on the value of anybody else's.
Most supporters of the capital punishment, offer the common argument that the death penalty serves as a crime deterrent. However, this accepted belief isn't supported by valid evidence. If there is no reliable evidence to support the claim that the death penalty deters crime, there is no reason to not consider life imprisonment to be just as much if not more of a deterrent. With there being no solid evidence in supporting the death penalty, there is no solid reason for killing criminals when punishment could be enforced in another
