hello I have to reply to my classmates about 80 words each for both reply
For the Death Penalty article Answer this assignment in the following manner:
1. What is the Value Conflict? Opponents vs Proponents
2. Identify some general Assumptions in the article (Unstated beliefs).
3. Identify the Descriptive Assumption (Unstated belief).
Since assumptions are not stated, you will not be able to quote a statement made by the author, but must analyze the premise (something assumed or taken for granted) of the statement.
What are the Values Conflicts and Assumptions?
Remember, the value conflict is between the opponents and proponents of the death penalty based on their respective value preferences. Assumptions are unstated beliefs; they are not stated in the article. Can you support or refute these assumptions with additional quality evidence?
For example: By definition assumptions are unstated. When the author states: “Even life in prison does not guarantee that they will not kill again”. Certain murderers have murdered again in prison, so this claim is factual. Some assumptions are that:
- An assumption is that persons who murder consider the consequences of their actions, but do they?
- That it can only be prevented by implementing the death penalty. (However, states without or without the death penalty have managed violent prisoners by building super max prisons and isolating these prisoners from the general population.)
Do you see that the assumption is derived from the factual claim as an unstated belief that supports the explicit reasoning. We can refute the premises (assumptions) upon which this claim is made by identifying the underlying assumptions and producing counterarguments.
What are the Descriptive Assumptions?
What are the Descriptive Assumptions in the Death Penalty Article? Descriptive assumptions are also unstated. They are the glue that binds the reasons to the conclusion. The descriptive assumption is the main underlying assumption in the article. What must we assume about individuals convicted of murder? Don’t over think this. If you would support the death penalty with the intensity of the author, what would you believe in your heart of hearts?
Here are my classmates responses
1. One value conflict that I struggled to understand in “A Case for the Death Penalty” is “We may not like the death penalty, but it must be available for such heinous crimes; otherwise, we are giving criminals, like Mr. Davis, a license to kill”. In our constitution we state that murder is an unjust killing of a human being (Murder–DefinitionsandDegrees). The death penalty has the same principle. We are acknowledging the fact that killing is okay under certain circumstances. What constitutes one reason over another and why are we allowing our federal government to kill people for show?
The next value conflict that jumped out at me was “No doubt by someone who had murdered before.” If we have the death penalty in place in states and life without parole in others, why are we giving convicted criminals this opportunity? We are told as families of victims that justice will be served, yet the offenders are walking the streets again. The judicial system is being lenient on their prosecutions. I also feel as if this could be a general assumption because we are accusing someone of a violent manner based on their past. How can we be so sure they committed a crime without evidence. However, to prove the authors point, it is stated in Prison Legal News that 64% of violent crime offenders repeat their violent crimes within an eight year time span (Clarke, 2019). Knowing these statistics we should be keeping violent offenders away for longer.
A general assumption would be saying lowering the death penalty opens the door for more murders to take place based on line 32 in A Case for the Death Penalty. The author is clearly frustrated with the judicial system and believes a reconsideration should be done to lower murder rates.
A descriptive assumption would be that Mr. Davis had only given in to the guilty charge because he knew the evidence was closing in on him. The point of the article is that the death penalty needs to remain enforced. Having murderers worry about the value of their own lives will enable them to spill the beans. Many offenders may believe they can cut a deal or be given special privileges if honest. Whatever it may be, the assumption that Mr. Davis was going to die led him into telling the truth and receiving equal punishment for an act he committed.
1536. Murder — Definitions and Degrees. (2020, January 17). The United States Department of Justice Archives. Retrieved April 3, 2021, from https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/ criminal-resource-manual-1536-murder-definition-and-degrees
A Case for the Death Penalty
Clarke, M. (2019, May 3). Long-Term Recidivism Studies Show High Arrest Rates. Prison Legal News. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2019/may/3/ long-term-recidivism-studies-show-high-arrest-rates/ #:~:text=A%20U.S.%20Sentencing%20Commission%20report,those%20convicted%20of%20non violent%20offenses.
example of reply
Hi Jennifer, I enjoyed reading your post. A lot of good information. This is such a “touchy” conversation right because we all have different opinions on topics such as these. The article is very confusing and needless to say, we are not given all the information for us to decide what is true or not true or what is right and or wrong. I agree with your point “The point of the article is that the death penalty needs to remain enforced. Having murderers worry about the value of their own lives will enable them to spill the beans. Many offenders may believe they can cut a deal or be given special privileges if honest.” Good job with your post.
2. Value Conflict – There’s always going to be two sides regarding the death penalty. One side feels that it is the only justice that any murderer can get for killing or harming another human being. The other side feels that it is not right to take the life of a human being no matter if they killed someone and the only justice is for them to be in prison for life. Society says that only under circumstances people should get the death penalty so not all people deserve it.
General Assumptions- A general assumption can be that someone who is on death row might be innocent. This is the conflict regarding the death penalty – sometimes there is not enough evidence that someone is innocent when they really are. Another assumption is that a murderer on death row is not able to be helped and get better so they will not murder in the future. An assumption is that every murderer will murder again and is not able to change.
Descriptive assumption- the descriptive assumption in this article is that the death penalty is the best way to stop murderers from killing. An assumption is that there is no other way to get justice and death row is the only option. Although, Mr. Davis said he did not murder this guy and might actually be innocent, the author still believes that he should get the death penalty.
example of reply
I agree with what you wrote for the value conflict. There are definitely two divided sides to this issue, and I think probably a lot of people in the middle. There is also so much to factor in when you think about what types of crimes, or repeat offenders, etc. a lot of gray areas. I do not think the author would agree with your general assumption of “someone who is on death row might be innocent”, I think he was actually trying to convince us of the opposite. He keeps saying that the justice system is fair and thorough and we shouldn’t worry that an innocent person might be executed. I do agree with your descriptive assumption that, “the death penalty is the best way to stop murderers from killing” that is certainly what the author wanted us to take away from this article.