Conclusion

 We are living in a rational world. As humans evolved, they became intelligent. We became able to know that logic, reason, and effects should be our goals in our lives in order to survive. However, there are still some things that cannot be explained irrationally. Those things could be good to remain unreasonable such as love, sacrifice, and other emotions, but we cannot ignore the vices, the things that are just too old and too stiff to follow up the growth of the consciousness of people. Then what we should do to them is not letting them be. That is actually not different from blinding yourself while a man in front of you is in danger, calling for your help. If we let the death penalty exist, victims of this old-fashioned vice system will eventually come out. Victims such as Troy Davis will keep coming up. We should not let that happen. We should prevent that from happening while we can by abolishing irrational death penalty.

Refutation

  My opponent's representative argument is that the death penalty prevents crimes by making the would-be-criminals afraid of the anticipated punishment, which is death in this case, of their behaviors. This could be true if we consider the possible criminals that are only brave enough to commit crimes when their lives are guaranteed to be safe. However, according to the survey conducted by death penalty information center, as I mentioned before, the visible result is actually opposite of their argument; death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down each year and that reduction faster than death penalty states so the murder rate percent difference in two areas increased each year. This shows that the opponent to the abolishment of the death penalty has already failed to meet their anticipations and is keep insisting it irrationally hoping it would work someday.

Confirmation

Death penalty has too many negative effects than positive effects. Actually, if seen in a general perspective, people can say there is no positive effect. Given this, death penalty is a very irrational system that could be used in modern society. This is because the original purpose of death penalty was too ancient; revenge or eliminating dissidents. However, revenge cannot help the victim or the victim's family or the criminal or whoever related. This cannot help or solve anything. Also, in contemporary society, eliminating dissidents only exist in societies of dictators. Therefore, death penalty is inappropriate for us to use in modern society.

People's right is also a very important social issue. For hundreds of years people fought and earned their rights however in the death penalty system we ignore such rights of criminals. They are the same humans as innocent person and thus should have equal rights. It is inevitable to treat them differently from the innocent ones since they have committed crimes however that doesn't mean we can throw away their rights in the name of law. We should also consider the rights of the physicians that work in the death penalty execution sites. When doctors become doctors, they make oath called the Hippocratic Oath which includes basic ethical foundation of doctors which is always working for the health of people. However, by making them perform the execution, we are forcing them to break the oath and possibly giving them unforgettable memory of guilt. That is violating the rights of the physicians. Whether they chose to work doesn't matter because they might be subtly forced such as the financial circumstances. Considering these, we should abolish death penalty if we care for people's rights.

Narration

  Death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a punishment of a crime regarding lives of people that puts a criminal into death. Currently 58 nations adopts capital punishment, 98 countries have abolished it , 7 have abolished it for ordinary crimes only, and 35 have are not using it practically. We can consider most of the countries are abolitionist and 90% of all executions are performed in Asia. According to death penalty information center, death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down more and more each year, faster than death penalty states so that the murder rate percent difference in two areas increase each year. This is the general background of contemporary death penalty. As you can see, death penalty is an old-fashioned vice that people should pursue not adopting it. If people ignore the following arguments of mine, it would lead to generation of more innocent victims of the system.

Introduction

  Do you know a man called Troy Davis? He was a convict in death row in America. He was accused of murder, however the surprising fact that startled people all over the world was that there was no physical or concrete evidence indicating he was the murderer. The victim was shot, but no gun was found. Nevertheless, only based on 9 witness's testimony, he was found guilty and was sentenced to death because the state he was living adopted death penalty. 7 witnesses of them confessed that they were forced to testify, however the confession was too late. It was after Troy Davis's execution in 2011. Many people mourned for his death, for there was hope and possibility that he could have lived if he was not executed for a little more time or if the state didn't adopt death penalty. His death threw a heavy question about the modern society's policy which is death penalty. If he was an innocent man, he is a representative victim of the death penalty. Not only the victims that could be resulted by the mistakes made in the process of death penalty such as Troy Davis in this case, but adopting death penalty doesn't have enough advantages than not adopting it. Therefore, the death penalty is right to be and should be abolished.

Final Draft

  2011 in America, Troy Davis set fire to the long debated issue, the death penalty. Davis was a convict in death row in America. He was accused of murder and got executed in 2011.The surprising fact that startled people all over the world was that there was no physical or concrete evidence indicating he was the murderer. The victim was shot, but no gun was found. By the logical reasoning the government is pursuing, he shouldn't have been accused from the first place. Nevertheless, only based on witnesses's testimony, he was found guilty and was sentenced to death because the state he was living adopted death penalty. 7 out of 9 witnesses confessed that they were forced to testify, however the confessions were too late. It was after Troy Davis's execution in 2011. Many people mourned for his death for there was hope that a young possibly innocent man could have been found innocent and have lived if the state didn't adopt the death penalty. His death threw a heavy question about the modern society's policy, the death penalty. If he was an innocent man, he is a representative victim of this policy. Not only there are victims that result from the mistakes made in the process of the penalty such as Troy Davis in this case, but adopting death penalty doesn't have enough advantages than not adopting it. Therefore, the death penalty is right to be and should be abolished.

  Death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a punishment that legally executes a criminal whose crime regards lives of people. Currently 58 nations adopt capital punishment, 98 nations have abolished it , 7 nations have abolished it for only ordinary crimes, and 35 nations are not using it practically. Technically, most of the countries are abolitionist and 90% of all executions are performed in Asia. According to 'death penalty information center', death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states.

Murder Rates in Death Penalty States and Non-Death Penalty States in U.S. (murder rates investigated by FBI)



 Murder rates in non-death penalty states grow down more and more each year, faster than death penalty states so that the murder rate percent difference in two areas increased from 4% in 1990 to 35% in 2009. As you can see, the background information shows that the death penalty is an old-fashioned vice so that people should pursue not adopting it.

  Death penalty should be abolished because its original purposes and anticipated results are inappropriate in modern society. Death Penalty's original goals, revenge and eliminating dissidents, are too ancient to be conducted nowadays. They were very significant goals that should be kept over the rights of people in ancient times. However, these days it is a widely known wisdom that revenge cannot help anyone related to the crime let alone the victims. Revenge cannot help or solve anything. Also, in contemporary society, eliminating dissidents only exist in societies of dictators because dissidents are meant to exist as long as people have their basic human right to think in the way they want to think. Therefore, death penalty is inappropriate to be used in modern community.

  Also, death penalty ignores people's rights. People's right is a crucial social issue that cannot be ignored when debating about death penalty. For hundreds of years people had fought and earned their rights, but in the death penalty system, people ignore such rights just because they are the ones of criminals. They are the same humans as innocent people and thus should have equal rights as innocent people. That doesn't mean criminals are innocent people. They should be punished in proper ways since they have committed crimes. However the fact that they are guilty and deserve to be punished doesn't entitle innoent people to throw away criminals's rights in the name of law. Even though they have committed crimes, they are still humans just like us. Also, the death penalty violates the rights of the physicians that work in the death penalty execution sites. When doctors become doctors, they make an oath called the Hippocratic Oath of basic ethical foundation of doctors which includes always working for the health of people. Therefore, making them perform the execution is forcing them to break the oath and possibly gives them unforgettable memory of guilt. That is violating the rights of the physicians. Whether they chose to work doesn't matter because some might be subtly forced by the things such as financial difficulties and needing of jobs. Considering these, death penalty should be abolished if people care for criminals and physicians's rights.

  Anticipated opposing argument against my thesis is that the death penalty prevents crimes by making the would-be-criminals afraid of the punishment, which is death in this case, of their behaviors. This argument could be true when considering criminals that are only brave enough to commit crimes when their lives are guaranteed to be safe. However, according to the previously mentioned survey conducted by 'death penalty information center', the visible result is actually opposite of their argument; death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grow down each year and that reduction is faster than that of the death penalty states so the murder rate percent difference increased each year. This survey shows that the opponent to the abolishment of the death penalty has already failed to meet their anticipations and is keep insisting it irrationally hoping it would work someday.

  We are living in a rational world. As humans evolved, they became intelligent and logical. People became able to know that logic, reason, and effects should be the goals in their lives in order to survive. However, there are still some things that cannot be explained rationally. Some of them, such as love, sacrifice, and other emotions, are good enough to remain unreasonable, but the vices, the things that are just too old and too stiff to follow up the growth of the consciousness of people, cannot be ignored nor remain so. Letting them exist is actually not that different from blinding yourself while one man's life is in danger in front of you. If death penalty remains, victims of this old-fashioned vice system will come out. Victims such as Troy Davis will keep coming up. This cannot happen. This should be kept from happening while it can be by abolishing irrational death penalty.

References

•Death Penalty Information Center (2011) Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates Retrieved from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates

•James R. Acker (9/16/2011) Davis case helps focus on what's wrong with death penalty Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/21/troy-davis-10-reasons

•ProCon.org ( 4/13/2009 ) Top 10 Pros and Cons - Should the death penalty be allowed Retrieved from http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000

•Wikipedia (2014) Capital Punishment Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment

•Wikipedia (2011) Troy Davis Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Davis

Second Draft

  Do you know a man called Troy Davis? He was a convict in death row in America. He was accused of murder and got executed in 2011.The surprising fact that startled people all over the world was that there was no physical or concrete evidence indicating he was the murderer. The victim was shot, but no gun was found. By the logical reasoning the government is pursuing, he shouldn't have been accused from the first place. Nevertheless, only based on witnesses's testimony, he was found guilty and was sentenced to death because the state he was living adopted death penalty. 7 out of 9 witnesses confessed that they were forced to testify, however the confessions were too late. It was after Troy Davis's execution in 2011. Many people mourned for his death, for there was hope that a young possibly innocent man could have been found innocent and have lived if the state didn't adopt death penalty. His death threw a heavy question about the modern society's policy, death penalty. If he was an innocent man, he is a representative victim of this policy. Not only there are victims that are resulted by the mistakes made in the process of the penalty such as Troy Davis in this case, but adopting death penalty doesn't have enough advantages than not adopting it. Therefore, the death penalty is right to be and should be abolished.

  Now, let's find out some general background information about the topic. Death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a punishment that legally executes criminal whose crime regards lives of people. Currently 58 nations adopts capital punishment, 98 countries have abolished it , 7 have abolished it for only ordinary crimes, and 35 are not using it practically. We can consider most of the countries are abolitionist and surprisingly 90% of all executions are performed in Asia. According to death penalty information center, death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down more and more each year, faster than death penalty states so that the murder rate percent difference in two areas increase each year. As you can see, the background information shows that death penalty is an old-fashioned vice so that people should pursue not adopting it. If people ignore the following arguments of mine, it would lead to generation of more innocent victims of the system.

  Death penalty should be abolished because its original purposes and anticipated results are inappropriate in modern society. Death Penalty's original goals, revenge and eliminating dissidents, are too ancient to be conducted nowadays. They were very significant goals that should be kept over the rights of people in ancient times. However, these days we know that revenge cannot help anyone related to the crime let alone the victims. This cannot help or solve anything. Also, in contemporary society, eliminating dissidents only exist in societies of dictators because we know that dissidents are meant to exist as long as people have their basic human right to think in the way they want to think. Therefore, death penalty is inappropriate for us to use in modern community.

  Also, death penalty ignores people's rights. People's right is a very important social issue. For hundreds of years people had fought and earned their rights, but in the death penalty system, we ignore such rights just because they are the ones of criminals. They are the same humans as innocent people and thus should have equal rights as innocent people. It is inevitable to treat them differently from the innocent ones since they have committed crimes and I agree with the idea of punishing them in proper ways. However that doesn't mean we can throw away their rights in the name of law. We should also consider the rights of the physicians that work in the death penalty execution sites. When doctors become doctors, they make oath called the Hippocratic Oath which includes basic ethical foundation of doctors which is always working for the health of people. However, by making them perform the execution, we are forcing them to break the oath and possibly giving them unforgettable memory of guilt. That is violating the rights of the physicians. Whether they chose to work doesn't matter because some might be subtly forced by the things such as financial difficulties and needing of jobs. Considering these, we should abolish death penalty if we care for people's rights.

  Anticipated opposing argument against my thesis is that the death penalty prevents crimes by making the would-be-criminals afraid of the punishment, which is death in this case, of their behaviors. This could be true if we consider the possible criminals that are only brave enough to commit crimes when their lives are guaranteed to be safe. However, according to the survey conducted by death penalty information center, as I mentioned before, the visible result is actually opposite of their argument; death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down each year and that reduction is faster than that of the death penalty states so the murder rate percent difference increased each year. This shows that the opponent to the abolishment of the death penalty has already failed to meet their anticipations and is keep insisting it irrationally hoping it would work someday.

  We are living in a rational world. As humans evolved, they became intelligent and logical. We became able to know that logic, reason, and effects should be our goals in our lives in order to survive. However, there are still some things that cannot be explained rationally. Some of them are good enough to remain unreasonable such as love, sacrifice, and other emotions, but we cannot ignore the vices, the things that are just too old and too stiff to follow up the growth of the consciousness of people. Then what we should do to them is not letting them be. That is actually not different from blinding yourself while a man in front of you is in danger, calling for your help. If we let the death penalty exist, victims of this old-fashioned vice system will eventually come out. Victims such as Troy Davis will keep coming up. We should not let that happen. We should prevent that from happening while we can do so by abolishing irrational death penalty.

First Draft

   Do you know a man called Troy Davis? He was a convict in death row in America. He was accused of murder, however the surprising fact that startled people all over the world was that there was no physical or concrete evidence indicating he was the murderer. The victim was shot, but no gun was found. Nevertheless, only based on 9 witness's testimony, he was found guilty and was sentenced to death because the state he was living adopted death penalty. 7 witnesses of them confessed that they were forced to testify, however the confession was too late. It was after Troy Davis's execution in 2011. Many people mourned for his death, for there was hope and possibility that he could have lived if he was not executed for a little more time or if the state didn't adopt death penalty. His death threw a heavy question about the modern society's policy which is death penalty. If he was an innocent man, he is a representative victim of the death penalty. Not only the victims that could be resulted by the mistakes made in the process of death penalty such as Troy Davis in this case, but adopting death penalty doesn't have enough advantages than not adopting it. Therefore, the death penalty is right to be and should be abolished.

  Death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a punishment of a crime regarding lives of people that puts a criminal into death. Currently 58 nations adopts capital punishment, 98 countries have abolished it , 7 have abolished it for ordinary crimes only, and 35 have are not using it practically. We can consider most of the countries are abolitionist and 90% of all executions are performed in Asia. According to death penalty information center, death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down more and more each year, faster than death penalty states so that the murder rate percent difference in two areas increase each year. This is the general background of contemporary death penalty. As you can see, death penalty is an old-fashioned vice that people should pursue not adopting it. If people ignore the following arguments of mine, it would lead to generation of more innocent victims of the system.

  Death penalty has too many negative effects than positive effects. Actually, if seen in a general perspective, people can say there is no positive effect. Given this, death penalty is a very irrational system that could be used in modern society. This is because the original purpose of death penalty was too ancient; revenge or eliminating dissidents. However, revenge cannot help the victim or the victim's family or the criminal or whoever related. This cannot help or solve anything. Also, in contemporary society, eliminating dissidents only exist in societies of dictators. Therefore, death penalty is inappropriate for us to use in modern society.

  People's right is also a very important social issue. For hundreds of years people fought and earned their rights however in the death penalty system we ignore such rights of criminals. They are the same humans as innocent person and thus should have equal rights. It is inevitable to treat them differently from the innocent ones since they have committed crimes however that doesn't mean we can throw away their rights in the name of law. We should also consider the rights of the physicians that work in the death penalty execution sites. When doctors become doctors, they make oath called the Hippocratic Oath which includes basic ethical foundation of doctors which is always working for the health of people. However, by making them perform the execution, we are forcing them to break the oath and possibly giving them unforgettable memory of guilt. That is violating the rights of the physicians. Whether they chose to work doesn't matter because they might be subtly forced such as the financial circumstances. Considering these, we should abolish death penalty if we care for people's rights.

  My opponent's representative argument is that the death penalty prevents crimes by making the would-be-criminals afraid of the anticipated punishment, which is death in this case, of their behaviors. This could be true if we consider the possible criminals that are only brave enough to commit crimes when their lives are guaranteed to be safe. However, according to the survey conducted by death penalty information center, as I mentioned before, the visible result is actually opposite of their argument; death penalty states have higher murder rates than non-death penalty states. Murder rates in non-death penalty states grows down each year and that reduction faster than death penalty states so the murder rate percent difference in two areas increased each year. This shows that the opponent to the abolishment of the death penalty has already failed to meet their anticipations and is keep insisting it irrationally hoping it would work someday.

  We are living in a rational world. As humans evolved, they became intelligent. We became able to know that logic, reason, and effects should be our goals in our lives in order to survive. However, there are still some things that cannot be explained irrationally. Those things could be good to remain unreasonable such as love, sacrifice, and other emotions, but we cannot ignore the vices, the things that are just too old and too stiff to follow up the growth of the consciousness of people. Then what we should do to them is not letting them be. That is actually not different from blinding yourself while a man in front of you is in danger, calling for your help. If we let the death penalty exist, victims of this old-fashioned vice system will eventually come out. Victims such as Troy Davis will keep coming up. We should not let that happen. We should prevent that from happening while we can by abolishing irrational death penalty.

Research 3

Source:

Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates

My Topic:
Death Penalty should be abolished.

What I hope to learn from this source: 
I want to find some statistics to support my argument saying that death penalty is ineffective in preventing crimes or reducing crime rates.

Notes:
1. murder rates in non-death penalty states stay lower than death penalty states in decades.
2. this statistic supports the ineffectiveness of death penalty.
3. this article gave me new perspective; death penalty(revenge) does not help the victims's families.

Final Thoughts:

I realized that in most cases the victims's families don't want revenge. Also, in the statistics suggested, death penalty showed the opposite effect of deterrence. This proves the ineffectiveness of death penalty. In the essay, I could say that for what does the death penalty exist, if it can not help the victim or the criminal or whoever related or even whoever not related, the society and its people? It is just an inefficient murderous justified vice.

Research 2

Source:

Davis case helps focus on what's wrong with death penalty

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/09/16/opinion/acker-davis-death-penalty/

My Topic:
Death Penalty should be abolished.

What I hope to learn from this source: 
I want to find a real case where a mistake has been made during the process of death penalty.

Notes:
1. Troy Davis was executed according to the death penalty policy even if there was no physical and concrete evidence indicating he was the murderer.
2. Besides him, there has been many victims of the death penalty, and there is no guarantee that cases like that won't happen again.
3. In my essay, I could alert my readers by saying that this could happen to anyone such as your friends your family and yourself.

Final Thoughts:

Troy Davis's is the most notorious case of the mistakes that has been made in death penalty states. By referring to his case, I could be more persuasive when saying that death penalty can have errors in conducting.

Research 1

Source:

Top 10 Pros and Cons

Should the death penalty be allowed?

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000

My Topic:
Death Penalty should be abolished.

What I hope to learn from this source: 
I want to find representative arguments of both people who are affirmative and negative about the argument so that I can get help setting my arguments concretely and also consider opponent's ideas. 


Notes:

1. the 'irrevocable mistakes' part reminded me of a young man who was executed innocently several years ago. I should research about him, too.
2. forcing the physicians to perform the execution violates basic ethical foundation of medicine. I could refer some clauses of the Hippocratic Oath and say that the death penalty violates it.
3. I could say that forcing the physicians to perform the execution and violating their ethical foundation of medicine violates their mental health by giving traumas.
4. an argument that death penalty deters crimes have been discredited by social science research. I should look for either the social science research or other statistics comparing crime rates between states that have death penalty and those that don't have death penalty.

Final Thoughts:

Both the affirmative and negative side's ideas helped me set my supporting reasons. However, the one thing I was not satisfied with was that it referred to some researches but it didn't have added in the boxes. I think I should search for exact researches next time.

Research Proposal

What is my current topic?

My topic is 'death penalty'
My persuasive essay will be about why it should be abolished because the death penalty is ineffective, supporting my idea with evidences and statistics suggesting that it didn't deter crimes. Even if there are some cases where death penalty reduced the crime rate, I will say  sometimes there are things that we don't do even if it is irrational in the effectiveness point of view. Also, I will say that death penalty is ignoring the criminals's rights and that we cannot ignore the possible errors that can be produced during the process of adopting death penalty such as people who are executed on a false charge.

What are my guiding questions?

I am curious about the effectiveness of death penalty, whether it really showed significant results, and the frequency of it nowadays.

What are my current thoughts?

I already know that there has long been a debate surrounding this topic. People who emphasize morality and people who emphasize effectiveness came into conflict. I personally am the one who emphasizes morality and criminals's rights. Therefore, I want to persuade those who are affirmative to the death penalty into thinking that death penalty can never solve a problem ultimately and that it is just a legalized murder.

What is the opposition?

My opponents will be likely to say that death penalty is a way to prevent crimes by making the would-be-criminals afraid of the anticipated punishments(deaths) of their behaviors.

changing the topic

I will change my topic from 'criteria in movies' into 'death penalty' because the former one was too subjective and controversial to set my thesis and persuade people.
My thesis for the new topic is 'death penalty should be abolished'

Research Proposal

What is my current topic?

The criteria in determining which movie is a masterpiece and which is not.

My final essay will be about my own standards in evaluating movies and the reasons and example movies to explain them. For example, I will explain about the movies that I thought were masterpieces but were assessed not as good by critics and the movies I thought were illogical and stupid but were assessed excellently and got awards; the movies I thought were underrated and overrated(ex.Mister Nobody and Frozen, Pieta).
I also want to distinguish real masterpieces and kind of fake masterpiece that just makes viewers think that they are not that sentimental to understand this great movie.

What are my guiding questions?

The criterion in art is inevitably subjective to some extent, but it is also inevitably true that there are films that everyone agree are masterpieces. Therefore, I am curious if there are any criteria to determine which movie could be qualified to be called as a masterpiece.

Why the films that critics call masterpieces are always hard to understand for non-critics? Should masterpieces be difficult?

What are my current thoughts?

I think that masterpieces are not the ones that is too obvious or just target for a popular appeal. Sometimes the obvious ones could be great but I think they should be more subtle and lead viewers to understand by themselves. Therefore, I want to persuade people to try to accept the movies that don't explain everything to them.

What is the opposition?

My opponents will be people who disagree with my criteria or people that denies the definition of criteria in art itself. The former will say that my criteria are wrong because they think differently.The latter will say that there is no such thing as criterion in evaluating movies because movies are art and art cannot be objectively defined or criticized because it depends on person who appreciate them. Therefore, my essay is going to be more general than individual opinions.

Research Question

1. why do people repeat things they regret?

2. why are we attracted to things that are forbidden? rebellion?

3. history of internet......
4. medical process of proving
5. creationism and evolutionary theory; the logic and proves in them.
6. cyber frauds - its solution 
7. violation of copyrights online
8. effects that movies have on human mind?
9. impacts of leadership and directors
10. improvement in arts along with in internet
11. what's the criterion in determining which movie is a masterpiece and which is not?
12.  death penalty should be abolished