Argumentative essay: Ivonne

DEATH PENALTY

Have you ever thought about whether the person next to you is a murderer or a rapist? If he is, what he would like the government if he had killed someone you know? Following the death penalty in our society is not humane, but do not help the problem and not give relief to the victims' families, who had to go through an event like the assassination.

Firstly, people should know the history of the death penalty. The first legal executions came to the United States was during the Revolutionary War against Britain. British soldiers hung the first person to die with the death penalty, Nathan Hale for spying (Farrell). The reason that I included this story is to show that if something has been working, why stop this working.Some of people said that sending the murderers to death row is inhumane because these people deserve the right to live. This is true because they have the right to live but have committed the heinous and horrible crimes.

It has also been the problem of overcrowding in prisons and jails. Some people say that this is a problem but have built more prisons will solve this problem. Once more prisons or jails built to help solving the problem, but the death penalty effectively stops draining more money from taxpayers to house murderers. These murderers get three hot meals a day, doing nothing all day long, and have a place to sleep only because taxpayers finance these facilities. Murderers sentenced to death does not deserve to get a place to stay. They deserve to get their lives away from them because of the heinous crimes that these criminals have done.

Many people say that the death penalty does not help because there are not enough people being executed. A major way in which the death penalty contributes to the family could exempt if someone is killed and convicted criminals were put to death. A perfect example was when Timothy McVeigh was put to death in 2001, which was the first execution since 1963 (CNN.com). The death penalty is good because prisoners who deserve to be killed, must be killed. This is a circular argument, which is a logical fallacy. A circular argument is when someone comes to a conclusion, because it is true for not demonstrated by the facts, in other words, the argument is pursuing its own tail. I think if people are only happens in a circular argument then there is no way that people gain ground to get rid of the death penalty.

In conclusion, this process is not humane and persons performing this task are playing another role asecinos. In the Bible, God said that the people must uphold the law (Holy Bible), but not in the same way as the damage. In the future, many problems could be resolved thereby remove the death penalty.