Student’s name
Instructor
Course
Date
Death and justice critical analysis
Edward, I Koch is a very instrumental person in American society. He keeps holding his position when it comes to capital punishment in the United States of America. The death penalty has always been an issue of discussion regarding the citizens of the United States. The debate has always been of great importance in the United States of America since basing the Bible’s argument as Koch states. Most people note that American society has been founded on Christian morals and that the Bible is writing with the most significant moral direction among Americans. It states that a person should not kill, and therefore this is what most people believe should be happening. The death penalty discussion through Koch’s writing takes a clear path as he uses facts, examples, and statistics to prove that the death penalty is not wrong and is suitable for the society in which we live. Thus discussed herein is his statement, discussion and stand that the death penalty acts as a way of justice. It makes society free of cold-blooded murderers, preventing them from getting a second chance to kill. (Koch,02)
When writing this essay, Koch’s purpose can be stated to have been the will and desire to prove to the reader that murder and the death penalty are not the same. He tries to bring to the reader that murder is entirely wrong and not the same as the death penalty. He praises the death penalty for bringing order in society and shuns murder. Therefore, his purpose can be said to be the role of the death penalty in bringing justice to those murdered and their families and those other crimes punishable by the death penalty, which include aggravated rape, among few others. This purpose of his serves to provide a ground for his claims and serves him to the best of making sure that everything works out well for his persuasion.
Koch uses different means to bring to fruition the components of his essay, and he does this very systematically and in a very adequately arranged manner. He uses narration, description, comparison, division, classification, definition, illustration, etc., to prove his point that stands and the idea that murder is wrong and the death penalty is an excellent way to bring justice for a murder committed.
He starts the essay by giving examples of how cold-blooded killers have become the ones to lecture the people of moral stands and moral creativeness even though the same people who have been convicted did the same wrong things (Koch, 01). In this, he tries to tell us that it is true that killing is wrong; however, it dawns on most of these individuals that it is wrong when they are headed for execution. Here he uses illustration and examples to show how these individuals have been able to realize their wrongs and give examples of how they give speeches about the issue of death and dying whereby they state that killing is not the solution. They go on to tell the authorities that what they are doing is wrong. However, he brings it out that they do not realize that what they are saying is completely wrong. He places the authorities as representatives of the people. Therefore, what they do in approving the death penalty is their work and the work of those they represent and thus the whole society.
He examines the seven commonly made arguments regarding the death penalty, and through this, we see how he turns them to favor him. Therefore, he compares those who oppose the death penalty with his views and the views of the proponents of the death penalty to prove that the death penalty is not the worst thing that has happened so far. It is a good thing and not a bad thing, as most people view it.
Some of these statements he examines are that death is brutal. Here he proves how different people have responded to this and how it is not easy to deal with. At the end of it all, it was realized that the opponents of this stated that it was a death which was barbaric and not the method used as he says that the practices like electric chairs and others were brutal. The introduction of lethal injection made the process to be not laborious. However, death’s action and reality remained barbaric, which he counteracts by making the people understand that it is always wrong to kill and end the killer is the only option since not killing them makes them have another chance to kill more people.
He examines other statements and makes an argument against include; do other democracy uses the death penalty; an innocent person might be executed by mistake. Capital punishment cheapens human life’s value; capital punishment is used in a discriminatory manner, religious grounds of not killing, and state-sanctioned murder. All of these Koch gives elaboration, examples, and incidences that they might be wrong. Even though this is a personal stand about him, we see that he leaves out some evidence that life imprisonment might be the best thing than death. (Koch, 03)
In conclusion, we can say that his stand, even though proven using examples and clear elaboration of the death penalty and murder events, might be mistaken. This is because what he presents is only one side of the death penalty and murder, whereby his stand leads him to make it right when it might not be entirely correct to have the death punishment.
Works cited
Koch, Edward I. “Death, and Justice.” Selzer 1997 (1997): 904-9.
