09 June 2008 - 15 June 2008

[luke]

The assignment for this week is a 200-word essay, with the title;

The death penalty can sometimes be a good thing. Discuss to what extent you agree with this statement.

[Learneng]

I don’t think that death penalty is a good thing or I would say sufficient for a criminal. In my opinion the person who did the crime should suffer more than a painless death. They should suffer the same way as victim had suffered from their crime.

I think they should get life in prison instead of a death penalty and the charges should depend on the severity of the crime. To support my believing, I would like to point out the recent case of the dungeon girl. The accused was arrested before for a rape charge and was released on the basis of a good conduct. They even deleted his records from the history files of the law enforcement dept., but we all know what happened after that. Now, not only his own daughter’s life was ruined by him, two other murder mysteries are also linked to him. I don’t deny that in some exceptional cases the crook might have changed but the majority remains the same and sets an example for the future criminals that they can get away with the crime.

If the punishment is strict and everyone is aware of the severity of it, criminal might have a second thought before committing the crime. So I think death penalty is not sufficient for a felon.


Nice try Learneng, well written and thought provoking. Since this is a formal essay, I have removed all incidences of colloquial English.

My one problem with the essay is that you argue that a life in prison is worse than the death penalty, and would deter them more effectively from committing the crime. Do you think they see it the same way?

~~~

I don’t think that the death penalty is a good thing or I would say sufficient for a criminal. In my opinion the person who committed the crime should suffer more than a painless death. They should suffer the same way the victim had suffered from their crime.

I think they should get life in prison instead of the death penalty and the charges should depend on the severity of the crime. To support my belief, I would like to point out the recent case of the dungeon girl. The accused had been arrested before for a rape charge and was released on the basis of a good conduct. They even deleted his records from the history files of the law enforcement deptartment. What happened after that ruined not only his own daughter’s life was ruined by him, but the lives of two others murder mysteries are also linked to him. I don’t deny that in some exceptional cases the criminal might change, but the majority do not. We need to the same and sets an example for the future criminals that they can won't get away with the crime.

If the punishment is strict and everyone is aware of the severity of it, criminals might have a second thoughts before committing the act. Therefore I think death penalty is not sufficient for a felon.

[Cayte]

Death Penalty can sometimes be a good thing.

   To what extent do I agree with the above statement? Logically it should make every sense for a person who took somebody life to pay back with his own in return; however, I do not see the justice in this logic. As a pro-life, I'm against any circumstance that might cause one's life, whether it is an abortion or a real crime. In my opinion, taking someone life or eliminating a human being from the earth is a sin.  As much as I want a criminal to pay for that, I am reluctant to sentence him to a gas chamber or to get a poisonous injection. Perhaps "life in prison without parole" is the first step to be considered.
   One of the precepts of our judicial system is that a person is assumed innocent until proven guilty, but this is only in theory. With the system that has a reputation of falsely convicting an innocent person, there is no way to know for certain if an accused is not a victim of a failure of judicial system so-called ‘justice’. Evidence at a crime scene can be easily tampered or planted and an experienced lawyer can manipulate the fact to his own benefit, so an outcome of the verdict may not always be just. There are many cases when an innocent person was penalized for crimes, he didn't commit. Is death penalty a good thing? Not in this case.


Hi Cayte,

I corrected the spelling mistakes before I edited the essay. You write very well, but in an essay you need to follow a set structure. You ideally should have an introduction, followed by a couple of paragraphs of different main ideas, and then a conclusion. For 200 words, the balance should follow roughly 30-70-70-30 (words) for these paragraphs. Each main idea needs to be strong enough to stand alone, and must also be supported by relevant examples.

Also, try not to apply a gender to your examples. Replace 'his' with 'their' and so on, in order to stay non-specific.

This was my fault really. Next week I'll be more precise about the structure of the essay. 

~~~

The death penalty can sometimes be a good thing.

To what extent do I agree with the above statement? Logically it should make every sense for a person who took somebody's life to pay the penalty with their own in return. However, I do not see the justice in this logic. As a pro-life supporter, I'm against any circumstance that might end one's life, whether it is an abortion or a real crime. In my opinion, taking someone life or eliminating a human being from the earth is a sin.  As much as I want a criminal to pay for their actions, I am reluctant to sentence them to the gas chamber or receive poisonous injection. Perhaps "life in prison without parole" is the first step to be considered.
 
One of the precepts of our judicial system is that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but this is only a theory. Our system that has a reputation of falsely convicting an innocent person, as there is often no way to know for certain if the accused is not themselves a victim of a failure of judicial failure system so-called ‘justice’. Evidence at a crime scene can be easily tampered with or 'planted' and an experienced lawyer can manipulate the facts to their own benefit, so the outcome of the verdict may not always be just. There are many cases when an innocent person was penalized for crimes they didn't commit, so the death penalty is not a good thing in this case.

[janestory]

Hi Luke,

I do agree with death penalty can sometimes do good things.

Firstly, death penalty play an important role to warn those who want to do criminal.If they fear to be punished by death penalty, they perhaps won't do a crime. Sometimes death penalty will reduce a crime happens. Secondly, everyone must be responsible for his behaviors. If they do a crime, they should be punished even death penalty. In some humanitarian's point,death penalty is not humane and won't be existed. But is it humane for a criminal to kill the other? It is vain to take humanitarianism consideration for those who don't care about the other's life. Finally, as judges sentence a crime according to the laws and the rules of saving the criminal and warning the others, they won't punish someone by death penalty until must have to be done.


Hi Janestory,

You have the general idea of an essay's structure, but you need to split your paragraphs up. You would then want to make full use of the word limit (200) by providing supporting examples and ideas. One important thing, pay close attention to the title and never change it or you'll end up answering a different question 

Otherwise, a good first attempt.

~~~

I do agree that the death penalty can sometimes be a good things.

Firstly, the death penalty plays an important role in warning those who want to commit crimes. If they fear the death penalty, they might not commit the crime. So the death penalty can sometimes reduce crime happens.

Secondly, everyone must be responsible for their behaviors. If they commit a crime they should be punished, even if that means the death penalty. From the viewpoint of humanitarians, the death penalty is not humane and shouldn't existed. But is it humane for a criminal to kill another? It is vain to consider humanitarianism consideration for those who don't care about the other's life.

Finally, since judges sentence a crime according to the laws and take into account of saving the criminal rights and warning the others, they won't use the death penalty unless it's absolutely necessary.

[little_butterfly]

Hi Luke, this is my essay. Thanks in advance!

I'm against death penalty because life is a precious gift and there are other ways to punish crimes. However, I could think that death penalty can work as a deterrent for other people who commit the same crime, but I cannot see any evidence of this. In Countries where death penalty is allowed there isn't a low range of criminality.
In Italy death penalty is not present and the problem is that often when a criminal is sent to prison after a while he/she can get off of it for good behaviour or penalty reduction, but even in these cases they commit the same or other crimes again as soon as they are out of jail. In my opinion death penalty is not the solution, it would be enough to make the punishment sure and not possible to be reduced.


Hi Little Butterfly,

Your writing is good, and now I know something more about Italy which is always useful. Strictly speaking, what you have written is an article rather than an essay, but that's fine. Sometimes I'll ask for one particular type, sometimes the other, and sometimes a completely different task!

~~~

I'm against the death penalty because life is a precious gift and there are other ways to punish crimes. Despite the suggestion that the death penalty can work as a deterrent for other people who commit the same crime, but I cannot see any evidence of this. In countries where the death penalty is allowed there isn't a low range of criminality.

In Italy the death penalty is not present. A problem we have is that often when a criminal is sent to prison but receives a shorter sentence after a while he/she can get off of it for good behaviour or a reduction. Even in these cases, often they will commit the same or other crimes again as soon as they are out of jail.

In my opinion, the death penalty is not a solution. It would be better enough to ensure that the punishment sure and not possible to be is not reduced.

[Jasmine]

The death penalty can sometimes be a good thing.  I agree with this statement for two reasons.  Firstly, the death penalty probable reduces serious crimes.  I believe that many people fear to die.  It is easy to decide to do guilty if people know that there is no capital punishment.  Fifty years ago in Thailand, the government was strict with violent crimes and many criminals got death penalty. At that time, people were afraid to do guilty.  Comparing with present, the crimes tend to increase ever year. Next, imprisonment is not enough for some serious criminals.  Sometimes in Thailand, the police arrested criminals who have been released after serving a sentence for a short time.  It showed that they were not afraid to do serious crimes again.  In some cases, the innocent people were killed by criminals who used to sentence many times so the death penalty is suitable to these criminals.  Therefore, I believe that the death penalty can reduce serious crime and it is suitable to punish serious criminals.


Hi Jasmine,

Many people have different opinions about this topic, and it's good to read them all to hear a balanced argument. Your writing is fine, but you should break up the article into paragraphs.

~~~

The death penalty can sometimes be a good thing, and I agree with this statement for two reasons.

Firstly, the death penalty probably reduces serious crimes as I believe that many people fear death.  It is easy to decide to commit crimes if people know that there is no capital punishment.  Fifty years ago in Thailand, the government was strict with violent crimes and many criminals received the death penalty. At that time, people were afraid to break the law.  The situation is easier now and crimes are increasing every year.

Secondly, imprisonment is not enough for some dangerous criminals.  Sometimes in Thailand, the police rearrest criminals who have been released after serving a short sentence.   It shows that they were not afraid to commit serious crimes again.  In some cases, the innocent people are killed by criminals who have been used to sentenced many times, so the death penalty is a suitable punishment for these criminals.

Therefore, I believe that the death penalty can reduce serious crime and it is suitable to punish serious criminals.