Identify and shape one counter-argument (#4) on the death penalty debate (but remember, your starting position is to abolish the death penalty), using two key authorities for the counter-argument; counter any one of the listed objections from the previous description of the required Five-Point Position Pattern:
Brings Closure to the Victim’s Families?
States’ Right? (Constitutional?)
I listed most of the sources in the Death Penalty Sources page that support either Deterrence or Brings Justice.
This short assignment is easy; all you need is two short paragraphs (each three or four sentences) : your first sourced paragraph will be the objection, and your second sourced paragraph will be the counter. For example, bold a brief sub-title of the objection, followed by a question mark:
Dr. Craig Malhausen claims that capital punishment deters capital crimes (homicides). Then, add one or two of his supporting sentences. Then, end your paragraph with the parenthetical boundary end-marker: (Heritage Foundation).
Then in a new paragraph, counter with another source from the American Civil Liberties Union, The Death Penalty Information Center, attorney Pattis (from the FOX news debate video) etc.
Simple as that! Review the Student Example Paper in the Week Three Modules for a good idea of a decent paper.
The FOX news video I posted in the Death Penalty Sources, although dated, has a complete counter-argument using deterrence as their debate (two attorneys debating), so you can just quote or paraphrase the two opposing sources.
All we need for the counter-argument part of this assignment is just two separate paragraphs (all paragraphs for this assignment should range from three to five sentences).
Go to the Death Penalty Sources to get what you need for this assignment; also, review again the Student Sample paper.
You can also choose to counter any of the following reasons (for the death penalty); but in any case, the first paragraph is your sourced objection, and the second paragraph is your sourced counter.
Brings Justice?: “‘eye for an eye”? Malthausen again, or NYU law professor and author, Blecker (all in the source list).
Saves Money?: don’t waste taxpayers money on keeping murderers alive?
Brings Closure to the Victim’s Family?: families can now start the healing process?
Constitutional? Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales claims the Tenth Amendment supports the death penalty.