Writer: Kitty Wang 王XX Reviewer: Heidi Chen 陳XX
Date: 10/17/2010 (Draft 01) Date: 10/19/2010 (Review 01)
Death penalty
Death penalty is enforced in many countries, Taiwan included. Although 124 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, and the number is steadily increasing, it is still a controversial issue. Whether to abolish death penalty (or not) involves different aspects of concerns such as human rights, law, and religion. Thise issue has been discussed for a long time, and it is like a wide spread issue debated in Taiwan in recent years. To me, I am against to death penalty for the following reasons, and I will elaborate them in each paragraph.
First, I consider that death penalty is not an effective way to defer crime. The ultimate goal to createestablish or contact laws is to decrease the crime rate. However, death penalty does not truly decline the crime rate but it continues a cycle of violence. Sometimes, it tends to be used as a tool to revenge, and this will cause more crimes. According to a study, the average homicide rate for the United States is 7.2 (and it will be noted that the death penalty obtains in most of the states), while in the following countries without the death punishment, the average homicide rate is, namely, Italy 3.59, Holland 0.31, Sweden, 1.31, Norway 0.82. This proves that the countries having no capital punishment have a low homicide rate in comparison with death penalty countries.
Second, I assume that death penalty is not always subjectiveobjective. Economic and racial bias is often involved in the use of death penalty. Legal systems are not always fair to the poor and to members of minority ethnic groups such as blacks in the U.S. There are an international organization called Amnesty International that is opposed to death penalty and torture. A study conducted by it showed shows that in some countries, the death penalty is not used for crimes, but as a tool of political repression and to eliminate political opponents.
Third, I think capital punishment is the denial of human rights. Since (that) everyone is protected by legal systems, death penalty morally and fundamentally undermines the basic value of human right. It is really conflicting to deprive one’s life.
In contract.,However, some countries might think that death penalty is necessary because they regard it as the best way to maintain justice and social order. The governments claim that death penalty can find a justice for the victims, and give comfort to victims’ family. However, in most situations, death penalty does not relieve the victim’s family. instead but it makes another family suffer from endless pain. What worse, dDeath penalty deepens the hatred between people.
In the end, I stand up for abolishing death penalty. Death penalty is a matter of life and death, but its disadvantages are more than its advantages. Due toSince the practice of death penalty is not a proper way to decline crime rate, it is not subjective enough, and it is the denial of human rights, I approve of abolishing death penaltyam oppossed to it. TThe taking ofpeople’s human life as a mode of punishment is not justified in historical facts or human experience. I hope that there can be a replacement for death penalty to avoid the disadvantages of it.
1. What do you like most about the writing? Choose the most interesting idea and explain why itcaptured your attention.
I like the first point in the second paragraph, in which the writer mentions that death penalty is not an effective way to reduce the crime rate. I have seen this contention in many researches before. It’s quite interesting to know death penalty seems not so useful in some countries. I am wondering about how these results are measured by the researchers; also, I am wondering about its generality. Several aspects are involved when measuring the crime rate in an area, like population, geographical size, historical background, and many more. Can the data from the U.S. be applied to Taiwan, or Russia’s to India?
2. What is the main idea? What is the writing trying to explain to readers?
The main idea of the writing is that death penalty should be abolished. The writer tries to explain the three reasons why she is opposed to death penalty. She thinks the practice of death penalty is not a proper way to decline crime rate, is not subjective enough, and is the denial of human rights; therefore, she suggests that death penalty be abolished.
3. What parts in the writing seem unclear?
There are several parts that can be improved: First, the topic sentence of the writer’s first point is not clear so that I cannot tell what the paragraph is going to discuss about. Second, the fourth paragraph is too short to fully explain the third idea which the writer is going to tell the readers. Third, in the fifth paragraph, some parts are not clear enough. It would be better that the writer add sentences to make it more understandable.
4. How could the writer make the piece clearer? Suggestions? Be specific.
Since whether to abolish death penalty is a big issue, I think the writer can try to explain more so that draw a clearer picture to readers. Maybe she can try to both tell about viewpoints of those who stand for eliminating death penalty and the opposite. That way, the writing would be more convincing and readers might not doubt the points the writer claims.
As for the suggestion, just like what I mention in question 3, maybe the writer can change the topic into a more specific one. Second, the writer should revise the second paragraph. It would be better to paraphrase the sentences into her own words. Third, the fourth paragraph is not fully explained. The writer can try to give more explanation about why she considers the capital punishment is the denial of human rights. Also, it would be better that the writer add sentences to make the fifth paragraph more understandable.
October 20, 2010
Dear Kitty,
I like your writing very much, although I still hold the same view that the existence of death penalty still has its necessity. To me, it is not easy to choose death penalty as argumentative topic and hard to take a position as well, for either side has its advantages and disadvantages. Issues relevant to death penalty have been broadly discussed throughout world history. Currently in Taiwan, whether to abolish death penalty has also been subject to debate. It is good that you try to share your view points on the big issue and explain them in your writing.
However, after reading your draft, I have some questions. First, I don’t quite understand the first two sentences in the second paragraph. What do you mean by “defer crime”? Also, I don’t understand what you mean by saying “contact law” in the second sentence. Are you trying to say “conduct”?
As for my suggestion, I think first of all you can try to think about a more specific topic for your argumentative writing. Besides, I think it is better that you both tell about viewpoints of those who stand for eliminating death penalty and the opposite(just like the third organization example given on e-course), since the position you take is one which there are many obvious objections. Thirdly, you need to revise the second paragraph into your own words. Last one to suggest, some parts in your writing seem unclear or are not fully explained; please check the notes at the right hand side of your writing and do the revision.
I believe you can do better in your second draft.
Keep up with the good work!
Sincerely,
Heidi