Death and Justice Questions

Meaning

1. Koch’s thesis in favor of capital punishment is, “Life is indeed precious, and I believe the death penalty helps to affirm this fact.” [pg 320] He asks for the readers to agree with the fact that human life is in fact precious and that anything should be done to keep this notion true. He argues that if the value of life were imperative and the death penalty were “a real responsibility in the minds of the murderers, they might well have stayed their hand.” Koch believes that these ideals would discourage many “cold-blooded murderers” from killing so many people.
2. Koch focuses on the death penalty as a deterrent to murder and as a form of justice for murder done. In his argument, Koch emphasizes both these points when he states, “If we create a society in which injustice is not tolerated, incidents of murder-the most flagrant form of justice-will diminish.” [pg 321] Here he states that with the death penalty, society will enforce a way of life in which a tight justice system will be key and the value of human life would be crucial. This statement also emphasizes the idea that the death penalty will indeed diminish incidents of murder.

Purpose and Audience

1. Koch’s purpose in this essay does seem political. It serves as nothing more than a justification for his beliefs on capital punishment. In return, this is just another way to aim for votes. In one statement, Koch says, “Because I support the death penalty for heinous crimes of murder, I have sometimes been the subject of emotional and outraged attacks by voters who find my position reprehensible or worse.” Here, he is making himself seem the victim of “attacks by voters.” This could be nothing more than a way to get the understanding of those who find Koch at fault.
2. Koch seems to expect his audience to disagree with his position on capital punishment. He begins his opening paragraphs with the idea that “Killing is wrong.” Throughout the entire essay, Koch names the reasons for which many may not support the death penalty. He provides all the counterarguments and negates them with supporting evidence. This then gives us the idea that Koch was expecting his audience’s disagreement on the subject.
3. Koch places the responsibility on society to stand up and protect the innocent lives of others by accepting capital punishment as a solution to murder. For them to lose the “moral cowardice” that makes criminals grow “bolder” and to take action involving their community.



Method and Structure

1.
A. Emotional:
· “When we lower the penalty for murder, it signals a lessened regard for the value of the victim’s life.” [pg 322-323]
· “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder” [pg 323]
B. Ethical:
· “During my 22 years in public service…” [pg 320]
· “As a district leader, councilman, congressman, and mayor…” [pg 320]
C. Rational:
· “A study at M.I.T. showed that based on 1970 homicide rates….” [pg 321]
· “On June 22, 1984, the New York Times published an editorial…” [pg 320]

The emotional appeals proved to be most effective. The reason why is because it truly touched the reader as a form of connection that was made through the writing. It tied the reader with the author’s views and ideas, which was the purpose of the paper. The ethical appeals proved to be the least effective. I don’t think it matters his professions or his years in public service. These ideas are the least in mind to the reader when discussing such subjects.

2. MAJOR PREMISE: All killers admit to the wrongs when they face death themselves, to bring those who sentenced them to death down to their level.

MINOR PREMISE: Willie and Shaw charged with the death penalty admitted right before their deaths that “Killing is wrong” and that “Killing is wrong when I did it. Killing is wrong when you do it.” [pg 319-320]
CONCLUSION: Willie and Shaw sought “to bring his accusers down to his own level.” [pg 323]
Koch denies its validity by stating that “The state has rights that the private individual does not. In a democracy, those rights are given to the state by the electorate.” Here Koch is justifying the laws right to execute those charged with murder.

3. When Koch countered the argument that “the death penalty is ‘barbaric’” he completely diminished this argument by stating that “it’s not the method that really troubles opponents. It’s the death itself they consider barbaric.” This method of argument is incredibly convincing because it gives Koch’s argument importance due to the fact that those opponents consider “death” itself “barbaric.” Considering this fact, Koch can argue that those same opponents would consider “murder” “barbaric” as well and therefore, do nothing about that situation.

4. Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw… “hoped to soften the resolve of those who sentenced them to death.” Emphasizes the idea that killers try to bring down their accusers when it comes down to their deaths. [pg 323] Luis Vera and the “tragic death of Rosa Velez.” “…I knew I wouldn’t go to the chair.” Emphasizes the idea that killers’ understanding that they won’t face capital punishment, in a sense encourages killers to go on with their plans of death. New York Times editorial on the lethal injection proved that “it is not the method that really troubles opponents…but death itself.” [pg 320-321] The analogy between cancer and murder proves that “one does not have to like an idea in order to support it.” [pg 321] “No other major democracy-in fact, few other countries of any description-are plagued by murder rate such as that in the U.S.” This supports the idea that “If other countries had our murder problem, the cry for capital punishment would be just as loud as it is here.” [pg 321]

Language

1. Koch’s tone is assertive throughout the entire essay. His language emphasizes his tone because he speaks his mind as he believes to be true, because in a sense he knows he is right and is certain on what needs to be done. This adds to the openness of the readers acceptance because he is able to counterattack every opposing issue that seems to be out there and clearly stands his ground on supporting his ideas.
2. Koch refers to his opponents’ thinking as “sophistic nonsense” and “transparently false” [pg 323] His use of words indicate that Koch’s attitude toward opponents of capital punishment and their arguments is degrading. He brings down their ideas by considering them unreasonable and untrue. Then he introduces his own ideas as ideal and right.

Writing Topics

The rising now becomes, “Whether or not murderers should be executed or not?” My response to that question is that it should absolutely be so. If you have in fact taken somebody’s right to life in this world, what gives you any better right to life than that person? You should pay the consequences for your actions and indeed suffer a painful death. Nobody should have any consideration for you because you did not have consideration for somebody else. After all "Don't do to others as you don't want others to do to you." What better punishment for these cold-blooded killers than the death penalty.
Murderers are the most deserving of such punishment. They kill in cold blood and enjoy themselves while doing it. They don’t show regret or remorse for their actions until they face death themselves. The only way to stop this plague of serial killers in the world is to place a great importance on the value of human life. The capital punishment should discourage many murderers from killing, with the fear of losing their own life. They enjoy the freedom to kill when the government only places jail sentences on their dealings. Why should tax payers have to give up money to feed, clothe, and shelter these undeserving individuals, when their lives could easily be ended. The death penalty seems like the only rational solution to such hideous crimes such as murder. In the end, even the Bible states, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."