Introduction
Often, when murders commit their heinous crimes, they do not consider that the circumstances could turn around, making them the victims. They often feel secure and in a safe position to continue with their activities. When brought before a court of law and convicted for their crimes, they often try to plead their case by making the authorities feel guilty for passing the sentence on them. This is what happened with Robert Lee Willie, who, after being convicted for execution in a Louisiana state prison, admitted that killing is wrong whether done by an individual or by the state. Other murders such as Shaw and Rosa Velez also allude to the same argument. The same pleas are used by people who do not support capital punishment. However, below is an argument that indicates capital punishment should be upheld, as presented by Koch (1).
Koch applies logos (para. 1) where he argues that many people take execution to be barbaric. The people argue that there is a lot of injustice in the death chambers where there can be agony inn the gas chambers or presence of faulty electric chairs. All these led to the change of execution methods such that today, the methods applied are painless death through injection with no ropes or gas, electric chairs or bullets. However, the opponents still continue arguing that the execution is barbaric. This proves that it is not the method they consider barbaric but the death itself. In applying logos, the author argues that capital punishment is just as unpleasant as the methods used to cure cancer. They are not pleasant experiences but they are the only option to cure the disease. Capital murder might not be the best way to punish murderers, but it is the only tool that the government currently has to deal with the issue.
Ethos is applied in Koch (paragraph 2). Here, there is an argument that the opponents of the capital punishment use. They argue that the sentence is not used by major democracies in the world. However, Koch counters this by arguing that people apply rules and regulations in accordance to their current situation, not as per other people. To this end, he argues that the capital punishment is absolutely necessary for the U.S.
In support of this argument, he cites the increasing number of crimes in the U.S. the murder rate went up by 122 between 11963 and 1980. In New York, the rates went up by 400%. As at the time, America citizens faced a larger threat of death than soldiers in the world wars. If any other country had such high rates of crime, then they would also put these measures in place. As such, the U.S is just doing what it has to do to control the situation.
In paragraph 3, Koch applies logos in a very effective manner. He argues that there are opponents of the capital punishment who argue that an innocent person might be executed by mistake. As such, the people apply these sentiments to argue that capital punishment should be done away with. To this end, Koch posits that if the government only acts when there is no possibility for a mistake, then it could as well be fully non-functional. He further argues that there was a study carried out where 7,000 cases of execution between 1892 and 1971 were analyzed for such mistakes. The outcome of the studies was that no such errors occur at all. This would just be an excuse for the people to stop the government from being functional. To further assert this point, he cites the case of Lemuel Smith who was serving four life sentences for murder and two more for robbery and kidnapping. He lured a woman officer into the church hall, murdered and mutilated her body. Sentencing him again would make no change, but would only give him a chance to try and kill again. Other evidence shows that in New York, 85% of those arrested for murder had been earlier convicted for the same and served various sentences. To completely remove such people from the streets, death sentence could just be the way.
Pathos is applied in Koch’s paragraph 4. Here he argues that there are people who argue that death sentence lowers the value of human life and its dignity. However, these people just consider the convict. What about the fate of the victim? This person is killed when begging for mercy, the killer heeds not to the pleas. The person dies and when the killer is brought to court, there is an argument that he should be spared due to the sanctity of life. Really? What about the life of the victim? Does it mean that there is life that is more precious than the other? All life is important and the killers should not be allowed to get away with such heinous acts.
In countering the argument that death sentence is discriminatory in nature, Koch posits that the appeal process is usually very long and painstaking. This is done in order to ensure that the verdict is fir and that there is no doubt to the case. As such, such an argument does not hold any water.
Religious people often argue that the sentence is wrong since it goes against the biblical commandment of ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ By using logos, Koch (para. 6) argues that in the original Greek bible, the sixth commandment actually states ‘Thou shalt Not Commit Murder.’ Well, this is bound for different interpretation by different individuals. Philosophers have tried to come up with an explanation for it, and they came up with the conclusion that only the sovereign can take life to vindicate justice. He also observes that the U.S constitution condemns inhuman and cruel punishment, but does not go against capital punishment.
Work Cited
Koch, Edward I. Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life. 1985. The New Republic, April 15, 1985. (Attached pdf).
